Read on Twitter
The "ND people make great scientists" trope is... incredibly ironic to me.
We culturally associate "eccentricities" like hyperfocus & special interests with (white male) genius, but in reality, academia is incredibly hostile towards neurodivergent junior scientists.
We culturally associate "eccentricities" like hyperfocus & special interests with (white male) genius, but in reality, academia is incredibly hostile towards neurodivergent junior scientists.
To land a tenure-track position in STEM nowadays, you need to publish incessantly while navigating layered, complex social dynamics. That requires skills in time management, executive function, communication, & emotional regulation -- notable neurodivergent weaknesses.
You have to be exceptional at ALL of those skills (none of which are explicitly taught) to land a tenure-track job.
To make things worse, many current professors *aren& #39;t* good at those things, because they got tenure when the job market was way less competitive.
To make things worse, many current professors *aren& #39;t* good at those things, because they got tenure when the job market was way less competitive.
So you are usually judged by people who faced less pressure than you, are quick to presume incompetence, and tend to blame failure on personal faults, not lack of support.
It& #39;s a toxic environment for *anyone*, and it compounds for folks w/ marginalized identities.
It& #39;s a toxic environment for *anyone*, and it compounds for folks w/ marginalized identities.
For ND people, current academic culture is traumatizing specifically because it precisely triggers our neurological weaknesses, provides no support, and shrugs us off if we fail.
All while exploiting our special interests for cheap and/or free labor.
All while exploiting our special interests for cheap and/or free labor.
It& #39;s an extra layer of fun if you& #39;re undiagnosed, because you have no idea why you can& #39;t just... do the things, much less *explain* that to your committee.
You just internalize the failure and begin to resent the topic you wanted to dedicate your life to.
You just internalize the failure and begin to resent the topic you wanted to dedicate your life to.
It sucks, because there are a lot of ND qualities that *are* helpful for doing science. We& #39;re inquisitive and obsessive and love to look at old problems in new ways; it& #39;s in our nature.
But STEM research nowadays maximizes productivity, not inquiry.
But STEM research nowadays maximizes productivity, not inquiry.
We burn out trying to meet metrics designed to measure success in neurotypical ways. If we survive, it& #39;s in part because we have to suppress the parts of ourselves that made us want to be scientists in the first place.
Both failure and success are soul-crushing.
https://abs.twimg.com/emoji/v2/... draggable="false" alt="đ" title="Auf den Kopf gestelltes Gesicht" aria-label="Emoji: Auf den Kopf gestelltes Gesicht">
Both failure and success are soul-crushing.
I wish I had a more hopeful way to end this thread, but I& #39;m in the middle of my 2nd grad school burnout, and I& #39;m especially sad and bitter about it today.
I have the supports I need now, but it shouldn& #39;t have taken 6 years and an exceptionally patient advisor to get there.
I have the supports I need now, but it shouldn& #39;t have taken 6 years and an exceptionally patient advisor to get there.
And like. I *want* to do research. I want to spend my days playing with data, learning cool math, trying to understand the universe, and sharing everything I can about it.
But I refuse to risk my life for an academic career. Not again.
But I refuse to risk my life for an academic career. Not again.