Walking Out on The Boys

By ELIZABETH L''HOMMEDIEU/PALO ALTO Frances Conley

Q. After 16 years as a professor at Stanford, you resigned abruptly, charging what you called "gender insensitivity" on the part of male colleagues. Most people interpreted that to mean sexual harassment. Were you sexually harassed?

A. I am not talking about sexual harassment. I think harassment is too volatile a term. Sexism is one way of describing it. It is a pervasive attitude problem. The examples I can give will seem trivial, but they are real, and they do affect a person who has a professional life. If I am in an operating room, I have to be in control of the team that is working with me. That control is established because people respect who I am and what I can do. If a man walks into the operating room and says, "How's it going, honey?", what happens to my control? It disappears because every woman who is working in that room with me has also been called "honey" by this same guy, and it means all of a sudden I don't have the status of a surgeon in control of the case being done. I have suddenly become a fellow "honey."

Q. Surely there is more to it than being called "honey." Are there any other examples?

A. When I was younger I would be repeatedly asked to bed by fellow doctors. This would always happen in front of an audience. It was always done for effect. Another common example is that if I have a disagreement with my male counterparts, I generally tend to get the label of being "difficult" because I am suffering from PMS syndrome or because I am "on the rag." That is a gender-identificati on problem. You can't say that to a male counterpart who disagrees with you. These men tend to use the female image and those things that are perceived by society as making women inferior, i.e., the fact that we are different biologically, and they make that the focus of their dealing with me. I define that as sexism. It is not sexual harassment. I have had male doctors run their hands up my leg, never in an operating room, but in meetings. It is always done for an audience. Two months ago, I stood up to leave a meeting of all men and me, and as I stood up one of them said to me, "Gee, I can see the shape of your breasts, even through your white coat." I am sorry, but to me that is not right.

Q. Why wouldn't men do this to you simply because you are an attractive woman?

A. I have analyzed it, and I believe it's because they cannot see me as a peer. They have to establish a relationship that makes me inferior to them. The one they can immediately grab onto is a sexual relationship where the man is supposed to be dominant and the woman subservient.

$ Q. You've said twice now that these sexist remarks are made in front of an audience. Why would that be?

A. They have to show their peers that they do not accept this woman as an equal.

Q. You have been a surgeon for 25 years. Why did you tolerate this kind of treatment for so long?

A. In order for a female to get taken into the club, which is necessary in order to get cases and to get trained, you have to become a member. I decided that I would go along because I wanted to get to where I wanted to be. I really wanted to be a neurosurgeon. I thought I could be a good neurosurgeon. Had I made an issue of some of the things that were happening during the time that I was a resident, I wouldn't have gotten to where I am.

Q. How pervasive do you think this kind of treatment of female doctors is?

A. The vast majority of men that I have worked with -- and there have been a lot of them -- are wonderful, warm, supportive human beings who make me feel good about me when I am with them. It is just a few bad apples, but those bad apples can make you feel pretty small.

Q. Are all the "bad apples" concentrated in the Stanford neurosurgery department?

A. No, they are not. I would say they are much more concentrated in the surgery department across all specialties rather than in, say, pediatric medicine or anesthesia.

Q. What do you think you have accomplished by resigning?

A. First, I will be able to rebuild myself and regain my self-dignity. When I resigned, I had not intended to make a statement. As it turned out, I did, because I wrote a letter to a local newspaper, and that does make a statement. Many media people said, "You are so naive." I really had not anticipated the reaction to the editorial I wrote. I have been amazed. It is like an abscess that has been festering for years. It's been getting bigger and bigger. What I did was throw a scalpel at it and opened it. Now there is pus running all over the floor. What I have done, I hope, is help others open up a dialogue about this. If we can get men and women to start talking to one another about what gender insensitivity means, then we will have accomplished a great deal.

Q. The day after you resigned, you attended a student-faculty senate meeting at which one student described a teacher's using a sex doll to "spice up" a lecture, and another student said her breasts had been fondled. This must have struck a chord with you.

A. I think the thing that hit me the most was realizing that these were medical students complaining, and they are having these kinds of problems in their learning place, where they are supposed to be free to learn and to train to become professionals. This is a pervasive, global problem for women who are trying to get into professional careers. I think the reason it is coming out is because of the critical numbers. Since close to 50% of Stanford's medical classes can be women, when you do something in a class that is sexist in nature, you're offending not four people but 40.

Q. Stanford President Donald Kennedy has just brought disciplinary charges of sexual harassment and professional misconduct against a male cardiology professor. The charges are based on complaints that two female medical students filed with the university several months prior to your resignation. Do you think your resignation played a part in the university's decision to take action?

A. No. I do not believe that my situation influenced this decision. I know nothing about this case. I have enough faith in the people who run the university to feel that they are doing what is right regardless of whether or not I have made a flap. I do not think that Kennedy or any other people would have taken my resignation into account.

Q. You have said that the structure of medicine was set up for men by men. How do you think medicine would differ were it to be set up by women?

A. It would be far less dictatorial. It would be management by committee -- by teamwork. Uniformly, my operating room is a team, and I believe this to be true of most women's O.R.s. The people who work with me are respected, professional, and do a job. We are all doing a job to reach a common goal, and that is to take good care of that patient. I think the nurses feel as if they have tremendous self-worth when they are in my O.R. There are lots of pleases and lots of thank yous. My operating room is a happy environment.

Q. Where does Stanford president Donald Kennedy stand on all this?

A. I have spoken with Kennedy, and I think he is very supportive. I am not sure he was aware that the gender-relationship problems were quite as significant as they are, and I think he has been most surprised by that. I know he has been getting an earful, because I have been getting copies of many letters that have been sent to him.

Q. You have said that with so many more females in medical schools across the % country, their environments must change. What steps would you suggest?

A. One is to raise the level of consciousness about this type of behavior so that the consciousness is ongoing. The second is to be sure that the appointments that are made to executive positions are made with a great deal of care as to what that person's feelings are and how they relate not only to women but also to minorities, nurses and secretaries. It has to be an environment where people are respected for being people -- where every person has self-worth and dignity. There would also be value in having more women in higher administrative positions in medical schools, where the decisions are being made.

Q. What has been your husband's reaction to your resignation?

A. He has been very supportive of it, primarily because he has been very aware of my unhappiness. He, too, has been flabbergasted by the supportive response and feels that it should have come out a long time ago.

Q. How has he handled all your private complaints over the years?

A. He has always let me be a very independent person, and that has been terribly important for me so that I could develop as a professional the way I wanted to. I think at times he has been distressed by my complaints. He will occasionally make sniping comments at people who he thinks have been demeaning to me, but he hasn't wanted to jeopardize that which I have done. He has been very careful not to be actively entered into the situation, but he has always been phenomenally supportive of me.