Responses to 10 common criticisms of anti-racism action in STEMM

Abstract

The wrongful murders of Black individuals during 2020 (including George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, Ahmaud Aubery, and others), compounded by a long history of similar incidents, inspired protests around the world against racism and police brutality. The growing anti-racism movement sparked conversations within science, technology, engineering, mathematics, and medicine (STEMM) surrounding ways to combat racial bias in our respective fields. A spotlight was placed on the discriminatory history of scientific research and medical practice, as well as the problematic modern-day policies that perpetuate the lack of racial diversity and equity in STEMM.While observing and participating in recent discussions about the racism that pervades institutions, departments, and scientific discourse, we have noticed a set of standard arguments against anti-racism action within STEMM. Ten of these arguments are laid out in this manuscript and paired with evidence-based counterarguments. Notably, while this manuscript is primarily centered around a United States perspective, most of our arguments and suggested actions remain applicable to other countries as well. It is crucial for a STEMM anti-racism movement to extend beyond national borders, reflecting the international nature of scientific research and collaboration.This team of authors represents a collaboration between scientists from historically marginalized groups and their allies. By compiling published academic literature, we hope to directly

Climate of the Field: Snowmass 2021

“…This section details some comments that are listed in literature or were experienced by the authors, with thoughts on how to respond. The authors credit Gosztyla et al (2021) [59], "Responses to 10 common criticisms of anti-racism action in STEMM", for a substantial portion of this section's literature review.…”

“…Scientific "meritocracies" do not exist. Even the man who coined the term "meritocracy" meant it as satire: specifically that a meritocracy would appear at face value to be equitable but would rather continue the cycle of disenfranchisement through systemic processes designed to deprive minoritized populations of education and, therefore, upward mobility [59,88]. Instead, success depends strongly on external factors which include but are not limited to race, gender, socio-economic class, and disability; the stress of these external factors contribute to greater cognitive load which in BIPOC has been associated with illness and reduced productivity [89][90][91], which further distances BIPOC researchers in terms of "merit".…”

“…The authors credit[59], which details "Responses to 10 common criticisms of anti-racism action in STEMM" for a substantial portion of this section's literature review.…”

Restitution Through Equity-Focused Mentoring: A Solution to Diversify the Physician Workforce

“…Based on a presumption that meritocratic principles inherently define the medical profession, many may instinctively criticize and decry such a “favored” approach that benefits select groups. A more objective analysis, however, provides irrefutable evidence for how strategies that favored now illegal discriminatory practices helped to establish and maintain the current inequities that exist in academic medicine ( 60 ). Redistributing resources and codifying justice into programs aimed at overcoming historical and ongoing inequities are essential to attaining indemnity and providing restitution for both past and present racist and discriminatory practices by academic medicine and academic health centers.…”

Chronicling the Journey of the Society for the Advancement in Biology Education Research (SABER) in its Effort to Become Antiracist: From Acknowledgement to Action

“…Moreover, diversity in the workforce and in academia is not reflective of the ethnic and racial composition of the US (Allen-Ramdial and Campbell, 2014;Li and Koedel, 2017;Morris and Washington, 2017;Martinez-Acosta and Favero, 2018;Miriti, 2020;National Science Foundation, 2021). Factors that influence the observed underrepresentation of racial and ethnic minorities in STEM are varied, and include the lack of access to research experiences at the college level, paucity of mentorship at different career stages, and the creation and perpetuation of institutional environments around race that range from apathetic to repressive (Mahoney et al, 2008;Villarejo et al, 2008;Peralta, 2015;Valantine and Collins, 2015;Whittaker et al, 2015;Zambrana et al, 2015;McMurtrie, 2016;Swartz et al, 2019;Folkenflik, 2021;Gosztyla et al, 2021). Interestingly, a climate survey of the membership of the American Physiological Society (APS) revealed unwelcoming environments across different sectors, including private corporations and academia, highlighting that issues with inclusion are pervasive in society (ASM Diversity, 2020).…”