The Nonbinary Fraction: Looking Towards the Future of Gender Equity in Astronomy

Aislynn Wallach; Allison Erena; Beck E. Strauss; Erin Maier; Kaitlin C. Rasmussen; Luc Riesbeck; Meredith Durbin; Vic Zamloot

arxiv: 1907.04893 · v1 · pith:5L7QD2XXnew · submitted 2019-07-10 · 🌌 astro-ph.IM · physics.soc-ph

The Nonbinary Fraction: Looking Towards the Future of Gender Equity in Astronomy

Kaitlin C. Rasmussen , Erin Maier , Beck E. Strauss , Meredith Durbin , Luc Riesbeck , Aislynn Wallach , Vic Zamloot , Allison Erena This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-24 23:18 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.IM physics.soc-ph

keywords gender equitynon-binary genderastronomyintersectionalitysurvey practicesinstitutional policymarginalized gendersgender frameworks

0 comments

The pith

Binary gender frameworks in astronomy exclude non-binary people and harm those facing multiple marginalizations, requiring a complex new paradigm for equity.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper argues that studies of gender equity in astronomy typically treat gender as a simple choice between male and female. This approach leaves out non-binary individuals entirely and, together with a heavy focus on counting people, causes real harm to those whose genders sit outside the binary, especially when combined with marginalization by race, disability, or class. The authors state that the field needs to develop a new paradigm before the next decade to serve all its members properly. They point to revised survey questions and institutional policies that treat gender as more complex and intersecting as the practical steps forward.

Core claim

The paper claims that reductive binary models of gender combined with an overemphasis on quantification are harmful to marginalized astronomers, particularly those at intersecting axes of race, disability, and socioeconomic status, and that the astronomy community must therefore develop and adopt a new paradigm based on a more complex approach to gender, including better survey practices and institutional policies.

What carries the argument

A complex, non-binary approach to gender that incorporates intersectionality with race, disability, and socioeconomic status, replacing binary male-female categories in research and policy.

If this is right

Survey instruments in astronomy must expand beyond binary gender options to include non-binary and other identities.
Institutional policies must address gender alongside intersecting identities rather than in isolation.
Quantitative metrics alone are insufficient and must be supplemented by qualitative attention to lived experiences of gender.
The astronomy community should implement these changes as it plans for the coming decade of work.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

Adoption of the recommended practices could increase the visible presence and retention of non-binary astronomers in the field.
The same shift away from binary categories may be relevant to equity efforts in other scientific disciplines.
Long-term tracking of survey responses under the new framework would allow direct testing of whether inclusion improves.

Load-bearing premise

That moving to a more complex, non-binary approach to gender in surveys and policies will best serve marginalized members of the astronomy community.

What would settle it

A direct comparison of participation, retention, or reported sense of belonging among non-binary and intersectionally marginalized astronomers before and after adoption of complex gender surveys and policies that shows no improvement or a decline.

read the original abstract

Gender equity is one of the biggest issues facing the field of astrophysics, and there is broad interest in addressing gender disparities within astronomy. Many studies of these topics have been performed by professional astronomers who are relatively unfamiliar with research in fields such as gender studies and sociology. As a result, they adopt a normative view of gender as a binary choice of 'male' or 'female', leaving astronomers whose genders do not fit within that model out of such research entirely. Reductive frameworks of gender and an overemphasis on quantification as an indicator of gendered phenomena are harmful to people of marginalized genders, especially those who live at the intersections of multiple axes of marginalization such as race, disability, and socioeconomic status. In order for the astronomy community to best serve its marginalized members as we move into the next decade, a new paradigm must be developed. This paper aims to address the future of gender equity in astronomy by recommending better survey practices and institutional policies based on a more complex approach to gender.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

This is a policy advocacy paper that applies established gender studies critiques to astronomy survey design without new data or measurements.

read the letter

This paper argues that astronomy's gender equity surveys should drop binary male/female categories because they are reductive and harmful, especially for people at intersections of gender, race, disability, and class. It calls for a new paradigm with more complex survey practices and institutional policies going forward. That's the core message, and it is presented as a forward-looking recommendation rather than an empirical study. The authors are mostly astronomers writing for an astro audience, drawing on external gender studies literature to point out that many existing equity papers default to simple categories because the writers lack sociology training. That observation is fair and useful as a reminder. The piece does a clear job of laying out why binary framing can exclude non-binary individuals and why intersectionality matters in principle. It stays focused on practical next steps for surveys and policies. The main limitation is that the claims about harm and the superiority of a non-binary approach rest entirely on cited prior work, with no original data, error analysis, or even a review of how current astro surveys have performed. There are no tests of the recommendations, no quantification of the problem within astronomy, and no engagement with counterarguments about measurement reliability or response rates. The argument is normative throughout. This paper is aimed at astronomers involved in diversity efforts who want guidance on updating methods. Readers seeking new measurements or derivations on gender disparities will find little to use. It is coherent on its own terms as an advocacy document and engages the relevant literature without internal contradictions. A serious editor should send it to peer review in a venue that handles science policy or equity topics, because the subject is relevant to the community and the piece is structured enough to benefit from referee input on the recommendations and evidence base.

Referee Report

1 major / 0 minor

Summary. The paper claims that binary gender frameworks used in astronomy surveys and studies on gender equity are reductive and harmful to people of marginalized genders (especially those with intersecting marginalizations such as race, disability, and socioeconomic status), that an overemphasis on quantification exacerbates this, and that the astronomy community requires a new paradigm with improved survey practices and institutional policies based on a more complex approach to gender.

Significance. Gender equity is an important topic for the astronomy community. If the recommended paradigm were adopted, it could promote greater inclusion. However, the manuscript supplies no original data, error analysis, or astronomy-specific empirical tests; all assertions about harm and the superiority of a non-binary approach rest on external literature from gender studies and sociology without internal verification.

major comments (1)

[Abstract] Abstract: the central claim that 'reductive frameworks of gender and an overemphasis on quantification as an indicator of gendered phenomena are harmful' and that 'a new paradigm must be developed' is load-bearing for the policy recommendations, yet the manuscript provides no data, error analysis, or empirical tests within its own scope to support these assertions.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their review. Our manuscript is a position paper that synthesizes established literature from gender studies and sociology to recommend improved practices in astronomy, rather than an empirical study. We address the major comment below.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: the central claim that 'reductive frameworks of gender and an overemphasis on quantification as an indicator of gendered phenomena are harmful' and that 'a new paradigm must be developed' is load-bearing for the policy recommendations, yet the manuscript provides no data, error analysis, or empirical tests within its own scope to support these assertions.

Authors: We agree that the manuscript contains no original astronomy-specific data, error analysis, or empirical tests, as this is outside its stated scope as a review and policy recommendation paper. The central claims draw directly on cited external literature in gender studies and sociology that documents harms of binary frameworks and benefits of more complex models, particularly for multiply marginalized individuals. This interdisciplinary synthesis approach is standard for position papers bridging fields; we do not assert new empirical verification within astronomy. We therefore see no need to alter the manuscript's framing or add empirical content. revision: no

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity detected

full rationale

The paper is a normative advocacy/policy document drawing on external concepts from gender studies and sociology. It contains no equations, fitted parameters, derivations, or self-referential modeling steps. All load-bearing claims are presented as recommendations rather than results derived from internal data or prior self-citations that reduce to the target conclusion by construction. No instances of the enumerated circularity patterns apply.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central argument rests on domain assumptions imported from gender studies rather than on parameters or entities derived within the paper.

axioms (2)

domain assumption Binary models of gender are reductive and cause harm to marginalized people
Invoked directly in the abstract as the basis for declaring current practices harmful.
domain assumption A complex non-binary approach to gender will best serve marginalized astronomers
Presented as the required new paradigm without supporting evidence in the abstract.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5729 in / 1391 out tokens · 32820 ms · 2026-05-24T23:18:57.670945+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

22 extracted references · 22 canonical work pages · 5 internal anchors

[1]

LGBT+ Inclusivity in Physics and Astronomy: A Best Practices Guide

“LGBT+ Inclusivity in Physics and Astronomy: A Best Practices Guide.” arXiv e-prints p. arXiv:1804.08406. Atherton, Timothy J., Ram´ on S. Barthelemy, Wouter Deconinck, Michael L. Falk, Savannah Garmon, Elena Long, Monica Plisch, Elizabeth H. Simmons and Kyle Reeves

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv
[2]

The Role of Soci al Sciences for Astronomy and Astrophysics - Lessons from the History of NASA and the Futur e of Interdisciplinarity

“The Role of Soci al Sciences for Astronomy and Astrophysics - Lessons from the History of NASA and the Futur e of Interdisciplinarity.” Astro 2020 Decadal Survey on Astronomy and Astrophysics . Berenstain, Nora

work page 2020
[3]

Too Many Boxes, or Not Enough? Preferences for How We Ask About Gender in Cisgender , LGB, and Gender-Diverse Samples

“Too Many Boxes, or Not Enough? Preferences for How We Ask About Gender in Cisgender , LGB, and Gender-Diverse Samples.” Sex Roles 78(9):606–624. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-017-0823-2 Caplar, Neven, Sandro Tacchella and Simon Birrer

work page doi:10.1007/s11199-017-0823-2
[4]

Queer in STEM Organ izations: Workplace Disadvantages for LGBT Employees in STEM Related Federal Ag encies

“Queer in STEM Organ izations: Workplace Disadvantages for LGBT Employees in STEM Related Federal Ag encies.” Social Sciences 6(1). URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2076-0760/6/1/12 Cech, Erin A. and William R. Rothwell

work page 2076
[5]

LGBTQ Inequali ty in Engineering Education

“LGBTQ Inequali ty in Engineering Education.” Journal of Engineering Education 107(4):583–610. URL: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/jee.20239 Chiang, H

work page doi:10.1002/jee.20239
[6]

Double jeopardy in astronomy and planetary science: Women of color face greater risks of 11 gendered and racial harassment

“Double jeopardy in astronomy and planetary science: Women of color face greater risks of 11 gendered and racial harassment.” Journal of Geophysical Research (Planets) 122(7):1610–1623. Combahee River Collective. 1977/1986. The Combahee River Collective statement: Black Feminist organizing in the seventies and eighties . Freedom organizing series Kitchen ...

work page 1977
[7]

Mapping the Margins: Intersect ionality, Identity Politics, and Violence against Women of Color

“Mapping the Margins: Intersect ionality, Identity Politics, and Violence against Women of Color.” Stanford Law Review 43(6):1241–1299. URL: http://www.jstor .org/stable/1229039 Davenport, James R. A., Morgan Fouesneau, Erin Grand, Alex H agen, Katja Poppenhaeger and Laura L. Watkins

work page arXiv
[8]

Studying Gender in Conference Talks -- data from the 223rd meeting of the American Astronomical Society

“Studying Gender in Conference Talk s – data from the 223rd meeting of the American Astronomical Society.” arXiv e-prints p. arXiv:1403.3091. Davidson, Skylar

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv
[9]

Gender inequality: Nonbinary tra nsgender people in the workplace

“Gender inequality: Nonbinary tra nsgender people in the workplace.” Cogent Social Sciences 2(1):1236511. URL: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/23311886.2016.1236511 Doan, Petra L

work page doi:10.1080/23311886.2016.1236511 2016
[10]

To Count or Not to Count: Queering Measu rement and the Transgender Community

“To Count or Not to Count: Queering Measu rement and the Transgender Community.” Women’s Studies Quarterly 44(3/4):89–110. URL: http://www.jstor .org/stable/44474064 Flaherty, Kevin

work page arXiv
[11]

The Leaky Pipeline for Postdocs: A study of the time between receiving a PhD and securing a faculty job for male and female astronomers

“The Leaky Pipeline for Postdocs: A s tudy of the time between receiving a PhD and securing a faculty job for male and female astronome rs.” arXiv e-prints p. arXiv:1810.01511. Fricker, Miranda

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv
[12]

For data’s sake: dilemmas in the measurement of gender minoriti es

“For data’s sake: dilemmas in the measurement of gender minoriti es.” Culture, Health & Sexuality 20(12):1362–1377. PMID: 29533145. URL: https://doi.org/10.1080/13691058.2018.1437220 Gonsalves, Allison J

work page doi:10.1080/13691058.2018.1437220 2018
[13]

Entrofy Your Cohort: A Data Science Approach to Candidate Selection

“Entrofy Y our Cohort: A Data Science Approach to Candidate Selection.” arXiv e-prints p. arXiv:1905.03314. Keyes, Os

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1905
[14]

The Misgendering Machines: Trans/HCI Imp lications of Automatic Gender Recognition

“The Misgendering Machines: Trans/HCI Imp lications of Automatic Gender Recognition.” Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact. 2(CSCW):88:1–88:22. URL: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/3274357 Ko, Lily T., Rachel R. Kachchaf, Maria Ong and Apriel K. Hodar i

work page doi:10.1145/3274357
[15]

Gender-Related Systematics in the NRAO and ALMA Proposal Review Processes

“The (Mis)M easure of Trans.” TSQ: Transgender Studies Quarterly 2(1):13–33. URL: https://doi.org/10.1215/23289252-2848868 Lonsdale, Carol J., Frederic R. Schwab and Gareth Hunt. 2016 . “Gender-Related Systematics in the NRAO and ALMA Proposal Review Processes.” arXiv e-prints p. arXiv:1611.04795. Magliozzi, Devon, Aliya Saperstein and Laurel Westbrook. 2

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1215/23289252-2848868 2016
[16]

Scaling Up: Representing Gender Diversity in Survey Research

“Scaling Up: Representing Gender Diversity in Survey Research.” Socius 2:2378023116664352. URL: https://doi.org/10.1177/2378023116664352 Mark McLelland, R.D., M.J. McLelland and R. Dasgupta

work page doi:10.1177/2378023116664352
[17]

Experiences with Misgendering: I dentity Misclassiﬁcation of Transgender Spectrum Individuals

“Experiences with Misgendering: I dentity Misclassiﬁcation of Transgender Spectrum Individuals.” Self and Identity 14(1):51–74. URL: https://doi.org/10.1080/15298868.2014.950691 Mizock, Lauren, T. Dawson Woodrum, Julie Riley, Erica A. Sot illeo, Nelly Y uen and Alayne J. Ormerod

work page doi:10.1080/15298868.2014.950691 2014
[18]

Coping with transphobia in employment: Str ategies used by transgender and gender-diverse people in the United States

“Coping with transphobia in employment: Str ategies used by transgender and gender-diverse people in the United States.” International Journal of Transgenderism 18(3):282–294. URL: https://doi.org/10.1080/15532739.2017.1304313 Occupational Outlook Handbook: Sociologists

work page doi:10.1080/15532739.2017.1304313 2017
[19]

Gender Diversity in Scien tiﬁc Committees and Their Activities at Space Telescope Science Institute

“Gender Diversity in Scien tiﬁc Committees and Their Activities at Space Telescope Science Institute.”. URL: http://www.stsci.edu/news/newsletters/pagecontent/institute-newsletters/2019-volume- 36-issue-01/gender-diversity-in-scientiﬁc-committees-and-their-activities-at-space-telescope- science-institute.html Oyˇ ew` um´ ı, O. 1997.The Invention of Women:...

work page 2019
[20]

Gender and the Career Outcomes of Ph D Astronomers in the United States

“Gender and the Career Outcomes of Ph D Astronomers in the United States.” arXiv e-prints p. arXiv:1903.08195. Prescod-Weinstein, Chanda

work page arXiv 1903
[21]

Challenges and Solutions to Collect ing Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Data

“Challenges and Solutions to Collect ing Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Data.” American Journal of Public Health 107(8):1212–1214. PMID: 28657779. URL: https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2017.303917 Thorpe, Amelia

work page doi:10.2105/ajph.2017.303917 2017
[22]

New Categor ies Are Not Enough: Rethinking the Measurement of Sex and Gender in Social Surveys

“New Categor ies Are Not Enough: Rethinking the Measurement of Sex and Gender in Social Surveys.” Gender & Society 29(4):534–560. URL: https://doi.org/10.1177/0891243215584758 15

work page doi:10.1177/0891243215584758

[1] [1]

LGBT+ Inclusivity in Physics and Astronomy: A Best Practices Guide

“LGBT+ Inclusivity in Physics and Astronomy: A Best Practices Guide.” arXiv e-prints p. arXiv:1804.08406. Atherton, Timothy J., Ram´ on S. Barthelemy, Wouter Deconinck, Michael L. Falk, Savannah Garmon, Elena Long, Monica Plisch, Elizabeth H. Simmons and Kyle Reeves

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

[2] [2]

The Role of Soci al Sciences for Astronomy and Astrophysics - Lessons from the History of NASA and the Futur e of Interdisciplinarity

“The Role of Soci al Sciences for Astronomy and Astrophysics - Lessons from the History of NASA and the Futur e of Interdisciplinarity.” Astro 2020 Decadal Survey on Astronomy and Astrophysics . Berenstain, Nora

work page 2020

[3] [3]

Too Many Boxes, or Not Enough? Preferences for How We Ask About Gender in Cisgender , LGB, and Gender-Diverse Samples

“Too Many Boxes, or Not Enough? Preferences for How We Ask About Gender in Cisgender , LGB, and Gender-Diverse Samples.” Sex Roles 78(9):606–624. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-017-0823-2 Caplar, Neven, Sandro Tacchella and Simon Birrer

work page doi:10.1007/s11199-017-0823-2

[4] [4]

Queer in STEM Organ izations: Workplace Disadvantages for LGBT Employees in STEM Related Federal Ag encies

“Queer in STEM Organ izations: Workplace Disadvantages for LGBT Employees in STEM Related Federal Ag encies.” Social Sciences 6(1). URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2076-0760/6/1/12 Cech, Erin A. and William R. Rothwell

work page 2076

[5] [5]

LGBTQ Inequali ty in Engineering Education

“LGBTQ Inequali ty in Engineering Education.” Journal of Engineering Education 107(4):583–610. URL: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/jee.20239 Chiang, H

work page doi:10.1002/jee.20239

[6] [6]

Double jeopardy in astronomy and planetary science: Women of color face greater risks of 11 gendered and racial harassment

“Double jeopardy in astronomy and planetary science: Women of color face greater risks of 11 gendered and racial harassment.” Journal of Geophysical Research (Planets) 122(7):1610–1623. Combahee River Collective. 1977/1986. The Combahee River Collective statement: Black Feminist organizing in the seventies and eighties . Freedom organizing series Kitchen ...

work page 1977

[7] [7]

Mapping the Margins: Intersect ionality, Identity Politics, and Violence against Women of Color

“Mapping the Margins: Intersect ionality, Identity Politics, and Violence against Women of Color.” Stanford Law Review 43(6):1241–1299. URL: http://www.jstor .org/stable/1229039 Davenport, James R. A., Morgan Fouesneau, Erin Grand, Alex H agen, Katja Poppenhaeger and Laura L. Watkins

work page arXiv

[8] [8]

Studying Gender in Conference Talks -- data from the 223rd meeting of the American Astronomical Society

“Studying Gender in Conference Talk s – data from the 223rd meeting of the American Astronomical Society.” arXiv e-prints p. arXiv:1403.3091. Davidson, Skylar

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

[9] [9]

Gender inequality: Nonbinary tra nsgender people in the workplace

“Gender inequality: Nonbinary tra nsgender people in the workplace.” Cogent Social Sciences 2(1):1236511. URL: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/23311886.2016.1236511 Doan, Petra L

work page doi:10.1080/23311886.2016.1236511 2016

[10] [10]

To Count or Not to Count: Queering Measu rement and the Transgender Community

“To Count or Not to Count: Queering Measu rement and the Transgender Community.” Women’s Studies Quarterly 44(3/4):89–110. URL: http://www.jstor .org/stable/44474064 Flaherty, Kevin

work page arXiv

[11] [11]

The Leaky Pipeline for Postdocs: A study of the time between receiving a PhD and securing a faculty job for male and female astronomers

“The Leaky Pipeline for Postdocs: A s tudy of the time between receiving a PhD and securing a faculty job for male and female astronome rs.” arXiv e-prints p. arXiv:1810.01511. Fricker, Miranda

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

[12] [12]

For data’s sake: dilemmas in the measurement of gender minoriti es

“For data’s sake: dilemmas in the measurement of gender minoriti es.” Culture, Health & Sexuality 20(12):1362–1377. PMID: 29533145. URL: https://doi.org/10.1080/13691058.2018.1437220 Gonsalves, Allison J

work page doi:10.1080/13691058.2018.1437220 2018

[13] [13]

Entrofy Your Cohort: A Data Science Approach to Candidate Selection

“Entrofy Y our Cohort: A Data Science Approach to Candidate Selection.” arXiv e-prints p. arXiv:1905.03314. Keyes, Os

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1905

[14] [14]

The Misgendering Machines: Trans/HCI Imp lications of Automatic Gender Recognition

“The Misgendering Machines: Trans/HCI Imp lications of Automatic Gender Recognition.” Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact. 2(CSCW):88:1–88:22. URL: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/3274357 Ko, Lily T., Rachel R. Kachchaf, Maria Ong and Apriel K. Hodar i

work page doi:10.1145/3274357

[15] [15]

Gender-Related Systematics in the NRAO and ALMA Proposal Review Processes

“The (Mis)M easure of Trans.” TSQ: Transgender Studies Quarterly 2(1):13–33. URL: https://doi.org/10.1215/23289252-2848868 Lonsdale, Carol J., Frederic R. Schwab and Gareth Hunt. 2016 . “Gender-Related Systematics in the NRAO and ALMA Proposal Review Processes.” arXiv e-prints p. arXiv:1611.04795. Magliozzi, Devon, Aliya Saperstein and Laurel Westbrook. 2

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1215/23289252-2848868 2016

[16] [16]

Scaling Up: Representing Gender Diversity in Survey Research

“Scaling Up: Representing Gender Diversity in Survey Research.” Socius 2:2378023116664352. URL: https://doi.org/10.1177/2378023116664352 Mark McLelland, R.D., M.J. McLelland and R. Dasgupta

work page doi:10.1177/2378023116664352

[17] [17]

Experiences with Misgendering: I dentity Misclassiﬁcation of Transgender Spectrum Individuals

“Experiences with Misgendering: I dentity Misclassiﬁcation of Transgender Spectrum Individuals.” Self and Identity 14(1):51–74. URL: https://doi.org/10.1080/15298868.2014.950691 Mizock, Lauren, T. Dawson Woodrum, Julie Riley, Erica A. Sot illeo, Nelly Y uen and Alayne J. Ormerod

work page doi:10.1080/15298868.2014.950691 2014

[18] [18]

Coping with transphobia in employment: Str ategies used by transgender and gender-diverse people in the United States

“Coping with transphobia in employment: Str ategies used by transgender and gender-diverse people in the United States.” International Journal of Transgenderism 18(3):282–294. URL: https://doi.org/10.1080/15532739.2017.1304313 Occupational Outlook Handbook: Sociologists

work page doi:10.1080/15532739.2017.1304313 2017

[19] [19]

Gender Diversity in Scien tiﬁc Committees and Their Activities at Space Telescope Science Institute

“Gender Diversity in Scien tiﬁc Committees and Their Activities at Space Telescope Science Institute.”. URL: http://www.stsci.edu/news/newsletters/pagecontent/institute-newsletters/2019-volume- 36-issue-01/gender-diversity-in-scientiﬁc-committees-and-their-activities-at-space-telescope- science-institute.html Oyˇ ew` um´ ı, O. 1997.The Invention of Women:...

work page 2019

[20] [20]

Gender and the Career Outcomes of Ph D Astronomers in the United States

“Gender and the Career Outcomes of Ph D Astronomers in the United States.” arXiv e-prints p. arXiv:1903.08195. Prescod-Weinstein, Chanda

work page arXiv 1903

[21] [21]

Challenges and Solutions to Collect ing Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Data

“Challenges and Solutions to Collect ing Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Data.” American Journal of Public Health 107(8):1212–1214. PMID: 28657779. URL: https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2017.303917 Thorpe, Amelia

work page doi:10.2105/ajph.2017.303917 2017

[22] [22]

New Categor ies Are Not Enough: Rethinking the Measurement of Sex and Gender in Social Surveys

“New Categor ies Are Not Enough: Rethinking the Measurement of Sex and Gender in Social Surveys.” Gender & Society 29(4):534–560. URL: https://doi.org/10.1177/0891243215584758 15

work page doi:10.1177/0891243215584758