Friday, September 26, 2014
Lately, those of us who are professional women in field sciences have been reading and posting on challenges and harrassment issues --both our own experiences and those of our students. More on that later, too. But several recent web posts have made me appreciate having a field party on Kamchatka that was led by women. See my blog on that topic.
But THIS post comes from reading an essay by a current senior at MIT about her experiences,
and posted to Facebook by our former University of Washington undergrad student Jen Glass, now a young professor in Georgia -- a rising star and one attuned to issues of gender and science. Thanks, Jen!
The young MIT engineering student (Jennifer) wrote, on 18 September of 2014:
"I am a senior at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), a materials engineer, an honors student, and a woman. I also have been told hundreds of times that I don't deserve to be where I am. MIT admissions decisions come out on 3/14 (for Pi) every year. By 8 a.m. on 3/15 everyone in my high school knew I had been accepted. Tons of people came up to congratulate that day and afterwards but seemed strangely insistent on reminding me that "it is a lot easier to get in when you are a girl because they get so many fewer female applicants." The idea that there was some sort of quota for women would be repeated to me over and over in the coming months, and it only got worse when I went to MIT."
Jennifer discussed not only gender, but also treated the topic of persons of color. Kudos to her for writing..
Damn --so many themes I can relate to over my extended career, still alive and kicking. I came of age scientifically/professionally in the 1970s, and in general I have seen some progress (though I have many stories about gender biases) --such as for about 20 years I was the only woman in a department, and today in our faculty meeting there were 7 women present (two more absent) (albeit out of a possible 43 ....).
But the issue of being admitted to an elite program, as Jennifer was, or being hired because you are from an underrepresented group, hit at least two major nerves. The first is, I could tell you many stories over my 30+ years in an R1 (primary research) university, when women who were as, or more, qualified than men were not hired for various unsupportable reasons. Enough to make me crazy, but I have persevered.
The second nerve it hit is the one I want to address, and it's very related to our MIT student's post: My niece is a systems engineer. Her profession is one I could not have imagined for myself, in my era, though some women in that era and even earlier did succeed in engineering, despite the odds (thanks largely to girls-only high schools, I think). So to me, my niece's success is a real testament to progress in WISE. And here, thanks to FIRST high school robotics programs.
This past spring, my niece was laid off. She had left a more secure position (where to this day they would hire her back in less than a heartbeat) to one more innovative and people-oriented. This more risky position didn't hold up, not because of her failings, but because funding in her expertise at that company declined.
I was confident, in the long run, that she'd get another job--one that suited her--BECAUSE MY NIECE IS EXCEPTIONALLY GOOD AT WHAT SHE DOES. And/but when having a conversation with a close friend, I heard them say, "She won't have any problem, she's a woman engineer, and engineering companies are looking to hire women" (could also say the same about people of color), it raised my hackles and contradicted my experiences over the past decades. And I am sure the same goes for my niece.
In my experience, a woman has NEVER been hired because of her gender, but in fact, she has to meet, or in reality exceed, the qualifications of any of the many others who apply for a position. I could describe several cases where a woman was actually the most qualified person in a search, and somehow,... somehow they did not get the offer because... let's see, what can I actually put on paper? Not much, but believe me, the reasons were commonly constructed without real foundations. Crazy making, but I have persevered.
So Jennifer's essay hit home on several accounts, not the least being reflections on my niece's career path. I do remain an optimist, but please, do not tell me that women and people of color are more easily hired (and retained) because they are from underrepresented groups. While it might happen, I don't believe that, at least in my own experience in the fields of science and technology, it happens more often than the reverse.
Tuesday, November 5, 2013
I had searched for a picture of Mary Buckland while preparing a presentation for the 125th Annual Meeting of the Geological Society of America. I was asked to make a presentation in the "Great Books" session, and I chose to present on William Buckland's Bridgewater Treatise (1826). Except that I called it "William and Mary Morland Buckland's Bridgewater Treatise" because Mary Buckland (nee Morland) was an important partner in Buckland's works, including illustrating, editing, and general partnership in all things paleontological. She was already a practicing paleontologist (though that label wasn't yet used) when she met William Buckland, marrying him about 5 years later.
Mary Morland Buckland wikipedia bio
In her short bio in Wikipedia, they have used a silhouette of the family, first published in their daughter Elizabeth's Life and Letters of William Buckland. I think Mary Buckland made this silhouette, but I am not entirely sure. It's pretty cute because it shows what a menagerie their house was, with oldest son Frank under the table. Mary is holding fossils -- ammonites, it looks like.
Finally, a few days before GSA, I found a photo portrait of Mary Buckland. She looks to be in her later years. She bore 9 children, five of whom survived to adulthood. She home-schooled them. She partnered with William Buckland in his paleontological works and did large illustrations for his Oxford lectures. So here is the only known picture of Mary Buckland:
Monday, October 15, 2012
|statue of Soviets mapping geology|
|Elena Sassarova to the left|
|Tanya Pinegina on Kultuchnoe Lake, 1998|
|Beth, Tanya, Katya, 2004 Kamchatka|
|Olga Alexandrovna Braitseva|
|Vera Ponomareva (middle) with Ontario colleagues|
Saturday, April 30, 2011
The oblique air photo above (by "yaozy"), available on Google Earth, shows dramatic tsunami scour features in the Minami Sanriku harbor. It also gives a better sense of the area I walked around in April of 2010. Finally I can faintly see the baseball diamond near the (destroyed) river gate, and get a sense of the tsunami erosion around the large apartment building at the shoreline, a building designated for vertical evacuation. I still don't know how many people used this building for evacuation, and if so, did they successfully get onto the roof because the upper floor was flooded.
I have been readjusting to life back in Seattle, trying to finish up several manuscripts that got pushed aside by the events of 11 March. These manuscripts deal with neotectonics and tsunami history of the Kamchatka Peninsula.
The other day, we were trying to imagine "life before Google Earth." I remember life before photocopy machines, let alone word processing! I was rereading a classic, early article by Minoura on a Kamchatka tsunami deposit, and wondering if we could relocate his sites. So much of Minoura-san's materials will have been destroyed by the earthquake in Sendai. I realized his work was not only before Google Earth and GIS, but probably done without GPS.... Though we had handheld GPS in our post-tsunami survey in Nicaragua in 1992, it wasn't working very well. Funny, there were two sets of maps -- the Nicaraguans had maps prepared by the Soviet Union for the Sandinista regime, and we from the U.S. had maps prepared by the U.S. Defense Mapping Agency, which said "destroy after using." The "KGB" maps were more accurate than the "CIA" maps.... Of course, air photos are still the best for on-the-ground location, though post-tsunami, things change. And some countries are not so enthusiastic about providing/ making public their air photos. How things are changing now with so much on the web.
Meanwhile (back to the present), thanks to Paleoseismicity:
for posting some good links, such as:
The title of this panorama project should be "japan-tsunami-panoramas" though.
From Google Earth, I found a newly acquired image of the harbor of Minami Sanriku that shows clearly severe tsunami erosional features, which by their looks are mostly from the outflow -- Bre MacInnes will be interested to see these. Part of her dissertation was about tsunami erosion, particularly by the 2006 (or 2007) central Kurils tsunamis.
Here is a before image of the Minami Sanriku harbor from June 2010:
and the same view from 6 April 2011:
and my rough attempt (I did not orthorectify the images) to outline before and after shorelines, as well as the scour ponds made by the tsunami:
OK, back to my manuscripts.
Thursday, April 14, 2011
|It's hard sometimes to think about statistics when peoples' lives are involved, but I found the data below heartening. Despite the widespread devastation in these towns, preliminary data show that really, most people survived. Early statistics used the total population of these towns, but these data attempt to count only the part of the population that was in the inundated area. |
The table is ordered from most to least casualities (= dead plus missing). I added the survivors columns, which therefore are ordered from least to most survivors, top to bottom. So the bad news comes first
Preliminary table of survivors within inundated region of Iwate, Miyagi and Fukushima prefectures*
|Prefecture||Township||Population within the inundated area (a)||Dead + Missing (b)||% casualites (a)/(b)x100||Survivors||% survivors|
|Average survival rate within inundated area: 92.7%|
|Statistics Bureau & Director-General for Policy Planning of Ministry of Internal Affairs & Communications|
|released "Populations and Number of families within the Expected Inundation Areas" in Japanese.|
|Inundation areas are estimated by aerial and satellite photos; not the survey on site.|
|*The table prepared by Yamamoto, Masahiro (Jody B. added survivor columns).|
Tuesday, April 5, 2011
Only some survive on top of the town disaster management center Pictures: Shinichi Sato/AP
"Chilling new photographs show people desperately clinging to a mast on a roof as the Japanese tsunami destroys the building beneath them.
In the combination of three photos, taken by Shinichi Sato amidst the March 11 disaster, survivors cling to an antenna tower and handrails on the roof of the Minamisanriku Government Disaster Readiness Center in Minamisanriku, north-eastern Japan.
About 30 people fled to the roof of the three-storey building and climbed higher as the tsunami rushed in. Only nine people survived and about 20 were swept to their deaths."
A young female official who kept delivering the evacuation message to townspeople until the last moment has not been found. Tanioka says the story of her bravery and dedication is now nationally known.
Lensman braved tsunamiWednesday, April 6, 2011 http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/nn20110406f3.html
"MINAMISANRIKU, Miyagi Pref. (Kyodo) When the municipal disaster prevention building in Minamisanriku, Miyagi Prefecture, was engulfed by the tsunami on March 11, its officials clinging to the top of the structure, a local photographer captured the drama in a series of pictures.
The photos, made available by Shinichi Sato, show the three-story building completely submerged by the wall of water except for its antenna and rooftop fence, to which Mayor Jin Sato and nine other survivors from the office clung.
(Shinichi) Sato, 45, who ran a photo studio in his home until the tsunami hit, captured the scene from an elementary school overlooking the town.
'A tsunami will come,' he thought soon after the powerful earthquake struck. He first instructed his family to evacuate, then took his camera and drove to a hilly area where he could see the town below.
As Sato continued pressing the camera shutter, he was oddly calm and didn't feel terrified, he said. Sato is now photographing the recovery effort."
From a Rapid Damage Assessment and Need SurveyThe report has high-resolution images from a number of the towns including and south of Minami-Sanriku. It is about 7 Mb and was provided to me by Tom Banse of Public Radio Olympia Bureau. Support public radio!
Monday, March 28, 2011
To the right is a Google map image of the towns we visited in April 2010 to learn how they were preparing for tsunamis. This trip was led by Nobuo Shuto and Fumihiko Imamura. We were an international busload. Minami-Sanriku was our second stop, coming up from Sendai.
If you followed the tsunami news at all, you will recognize the name of this town from the references to it as “the town that disappeared.” But many people survived, and many largely due to preparedness. We visited this town in April of 2010 to see how tsunami mitigation had developed. Minami Sanriku is no stranger to tsunamis. Here is a summary of recent historical cases.
1896 Meiji Sanriku and 1933 Showa Sanriku tsunamis. The town experienced two giant local tsunamis in recent 100 years. The Meiji Great Tsunami in 1896 showed the maximum height of about 3.5 m, and the Showa Great Sanriku Tsunami that of about 2.2 m. Information: Nobuo ShutoChile 1960 tsunami. The tsunami from Chile in 1960, reaching heights up to 5 m, destroyed the town and killed 41 residents. Thus in the public square near the shore there is a gift monument from Chile (a replica of an Easter Island monument) in memory of those victims. It was snowing when we were there in mid-April 2010.
"One of my neighbours who ran with her three-year-old baby strapped to her back later realised that the child had fallen off and been swept away as they struggled in the water," Shiba said. "It was terrible." "I was pregnant at the time and had to hang from the edge of a wooden roof when the water and debris gushed into my house," said Shiba, adding: "The baby died just one day after she was born." Across Japan's Pacific coast the death toll from the 1960 quake -- the strongest on record with a magnitude of 9.5 -- reached 142. http://hello.news352.lu/edito-25894-japanese-fishing-town-recalls-horror-of-tsunami-50-years-ago.html -- from 1 March 2010
Chile 2010 tsunami. When in 2010 (the 50th anniversary year of Chile 1960) Chile had another great subduction-zone earthquake and tsunami, Minamisanriku residents were ready for its arrival. The river gate (see photo) came down to keep the tsunami at bay, people evacuated to higher ground, and no one died, though there was damage to aquaculture and harbor structures.
(news article of 1 March 2010) --"Japanese grandmother Matsuko Shiba rests at an evacuation shelter in Minami Sanriku Town on February 28 2010. When Chile's massive earthquake sent a tsunami racing towards Japan at the weekend, Shiba knew to head for high ground, and for good reason. Half a century ago a killer wave from the South American country destroyed the picturesque fishing town of Minami Sanriku. Another refugee in 2010, Yoshida, watching her carefree grandson, said that her town 50 years ago received a lot of help from people across Japan. Today, she said, 'we also need to help people suffering from disasters overseas. And, we, the elderly, need to talk more about what we experienced to the younger people.' " http://hello.news352.lu/edito-25894-japanese-fishing-town-recalls-horror-of-tsunami-50-years-ago.html -- from 1 March 2010
Our visit in April 2010
It was a cold, wet day when we visited Minami-Sanriku on 12 April 2010. Our leaders took us to the waterfront, where a river gate was the main point of our stop, and we also walked in the park and saw the many tsunami monuments. The rain turned to wet snow. I look around at how flat is was and how close to sea level, taking pictures of an apartment building that was clearly labeled as a vertical evacuation structure for those near the waterfront. This particular piece of land was intentionally left just as a park because at high tsunami risk, and people could evacuate to the nearby tall, reinforced concrete building if there was a tsunami warning.
These gates are meant to keep tsunamis out. I suppose they may also be used for storm surges. They take time to activate and lower the gates, and on the day we visited, they could not get the gate down. In the 2010 Chile tsunami, they had plenty of advance warning, and the gate worked. They gave us a handout describing how they were trying to decrease the time to gate lowering with the possibility of using it for locally generated tsunamis.
Below is a "before" map showing the location the three features we saw on the waterfront of Minami-Sanriku in April 2010.
11 March 2011 Tohoku earthquake and tsunami hit Minami-Sanriku
You can see below in this post-tsunami image that the 4-story building stood, and what I read makes me think that people on the top of this building, which is now half-surrounded by water, survived. It also looks like the river gate is still there, but with severe erosion around the left bank. The tsunami would have significantly overtopped the gate, and in any case, I don't think there was time to bring it down. The park's trees have been washed away, from this view it's hard to see much else, but it's likely all the monuments were toppled and transported some distance, but they may be salvaged.
NHK World, 28 March: A 4-story public apartment building in the coastal area was almost completely inundated, suggesting that tsunami up to 16 meters reached the building. http://www3.nhk.or.jp/daily/english/26_23.html
The town hall was a three story building in the center of town. The mayor, Jim Sato, was one of about 8 or 10 that survived on the top of it, by clinging to things like steel railings, while about 20 others were washed off the top of the building, about 13 meters high. After the tsunami the building is a skeletal wreck--I saw images on an NHK documentary last weekend. The nearby hospital (the largest building complex in this oblique view) withstood the tsunami, with staff moving patients higher and higher, to the fifth floor; the tsunami reached the fourth floor (from NHK documentary).
16 March – town 10,000 missing: http://www.heraldtribune.com/article/20110316/ZNYT03/103163015/1/opinion09?p=1&tc=pg
19 March – situation terrible, some reason for hope: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/mar/20/tsunami-survivors-hope-shelter-japan
Although the numbers of dead and missing are increasing, there are now about 10,000 survivors accounted for; the mayor holds out hope that many still not documented left town for other places, but the fatalities are sure to rise:
When the Observer asked mayor Sato to account for the discrepancy, he said the problem lay in the manner of counting. "At first we assumed only the 7,000 at the public shelters had survived, but we realise now that many others sought refuge with friends or left the town. That was our mistake. I still can't tell you how many are dead. We still don't know how to make an accurate estimate."
From IOC/UNESCO report of 28 March 2011
7 km2 flooded of 164 total
There are many terrible images of this fishing village post-tsunami, but I am choosing to focus on the survivors such as these children in an evacuation center at a secondary school in Minami-Sanriku.
Photograph: Stephen Morrison/EPA