Wladimir Bulgar/Science Photo Library

THERE are more women in science than ever before – but they are not going as far as men. After two decades of progress, the proportion of women listed as lead author in high impact journals “has plateaued in recent years and has declined in some journals” according to a recent study. That matters because in science, publication is key to career progression.

Figures from the UK’s research councils show that men have a 3.8 per cent higher success rate than women when applying for research grants in biological sciences; there’s a similar gap in physical sciences. In medicine, it’s only 1.7 per cent – but it was 3.6 per cent in women’s favour three years ago. It is nearest to parity in environmental studies, where the 2014/15 gap was 0.6 per cent.

And another new study, from the American Economic Review, confirms that female scientists are still losing out on pay if they choose to have a family: married women with children consistently earn less than men, and often drop out of science altogether.


Emilie du Châtelet was a brilliant 18th-century physicist, but for her, choosing between family and career wasn’t even an option (see “The bold, brilliant woman who championed Newton’s physics“). Her successors today shouldn’t have to choose at all.

This article appeared in print under the headline “The right not to choose”