The Duke glass ceiling

When Young Trustee results were announced in late February, my friends-both male and female-were shocked.

Not because we thought Ryan Todd is a bad guy-I like him a lot; he is amiable and I enjoy his friendly wave whenever I see him on campus.

Instead our reason was this: The other two candidates were overqualified, and arguably better qualified for a position that requires interfacing with all-too-important people, speaking up and fully representing the Duke undergraduate experience. Katelyn Donnelly had three years of experience as a resident assistant. Under her leadership the Duke University Union has emerged from the obscure into an organization fulfilling its campus role. Lewis headed up the FAC Board and Undergraduate Judicial Board.

So faced with this competence disparity, we began to wonder if a gendered selection bias might be responsible. In the past decade Duke has named only four women Young Trustee, but 12 men. Here two highly qualified women emerged as candidates, but the cycle continues.

Then there is Duke Student Government. Duke has not had a female DSG president in almost 10 years. The last one was Lisa Zeidner, Trinity '00, who was the 1999-2000 president. Of course, this is partially because women do not run (primary example: this year). But when they do run, they are not winning.

Like Emily Grey, Trinity '03, who ran for DSG president in 2002 but lost narrowly in the final election. When asked about women's leadership on campus in an interview, Grey emphasized that the longer Duke goes without female leadership, the more difficult it will be to elect a woman in the future. These women will be fighting an entrenched system, which requires guts and resolve. And from the perspective of an alumnus, the greatest worry is that no one on campus seems concerned or aware of this gap; "no one is questioning it."

Granted, current president Paul Slattery did address the DSG leadership gap when he noted that women might encounter trouble when attempting to relate to the University's male leadership, but his poor word choice distracted from his point: Outside the student community, Duke remains an old boys' network (with a few exceptions, such as Donna Lisker's recent appointment as associate dean of undergraduate education).

But is this leadership gap exceptional to Duke? Or are other universities across the country in the same predicament?

After conversations with friends and administrators, I posit a number of hypotheses that may explain our leadership gap.

First, DSG is, well, DSG-an acronym that historically connotes inefficacy and slow change with perpetual election controversies. Perhaps women want to lead organizations where they will have the ability to effect change more directly and quickly. I know I opted for this.

Second, women at Duke need to get their act together. We need to stop acting dumb around guys in order to score frat bonus points. We need to stop destroying each other through insecurity-fueled gossiping. We need to stop tolerating disrespect from men. We need to step forward with confidence.

The more women who run, the better chance we have of achieving gender equity in leadership. On a positive note, as I prepare for graduation, most of the women I know do not embody any of the above qualities. They are brilliant, assertive and fully aware that women at Duke need to encourage and support each other. This positive trend needs to continue.

Third, voters do not elect or select based on competence. I remember when Jesse Longoria ran for DSG president against Emily Aviki in Spring 2005. The girls in my dorm said, "Jesse is so hot," and promptly clicked Jesse instead of Emily, despite her earlier stop in our room to explain her platform and her experience. When qualified women run, they need to get elected. This will not happen if voters perceive female leaders as either a conniving, manipulative Hillary or a weak and cute Laura Bush. The stereotypes are not representative of either Hillary or Laura, and are equally unrepresentative of Duke's female leadership candidates.

Fourth, women and men at Duke do not talk but need to do so. Through the years I have realized that panel discussions on gender and columns like this one mean nothing if men do not attend the panel or read the column. Men, please read. Dialogue requires inclusiveness, as men may have unique perspectives, bringing new ideas and solutions to the table. Let's expand the Common Ground experience. Coexistence is preferable to our current tendency to operate in separate gendered spheres.

Finally, we just don't care. Grey is right that students seem content with the inequitable gender representation (and minority representation, a subject deserving a column of its own) in student leadership.

We must start the questioning for the shattering to commence.

Rachel McLaughlin is a Trinity senior. Her columns runs every other Wednesday.