This conversation is amazing for many reasons. Ironically it has also opened my eyes as well. My own career has never been about seeking out speaking – both because of my own time issue (having kids, figuring out my niche) and because “I didnt think I had anything important to say” (hold chuckle, swami et al). Then I think about the few regional talks I have given and how audience members have come to me years later and thanked me for being on the stage with mostly men. I realize that as female mentors and leaders we need to put ourselves out there more, even just to send the message to younger physicians that their voice will matter and the door is open to them as well.

Again, thank you Scott, for choosing to turn a small tweet into a call to action. This is how real change will start. Proud to know you all.

I don’t find Scott’s argument that because there are no female speakers he has heard speak before, therefore he can’t invite females to his conference, very convincing. To say the least.
This completely ignores the fact that women to this day have a hard time in medicine, from female trainees in surgery being bullied and being victims of sexual suggestive language and different treatment to male trainees, to the bias that Diana EW mentioned in her tweet, whether that be conscious or subconscious.

Medicine, and EM and Surgery in particular, are male-dominated disciplines. Machismo and bullying is rife. You can not seriously be surprised that female EM docs are represented less on speaking circuits. But the only solution is to give them opportunities, to get them into slots, not Scott’s ” I haven’t heard any women speak on cardiac arrest before therefore I can’t invite them” nonsense.

Medicine is not isolated from the rest of society. We need to catch up.

Hey Scott. thanks for publishing this discussion. I am not surprised this all started on Twitter and that it felt so personal to you. The immediacy and impulsivity of twitter makes for very blunt, unsubtle, almost insulting nature at times. I wanted to make a comment in regard to SMACC since I have been on organising committee . It is true that after Sydney 2013, due to feedback regarding gender bias of speaker lineup, there was a deliberate shift in strategy of speaker selection as Scott has described. I recall meetings whereby we discussed selection of female speakers who are not only well recognised academically but also excellent speakers. It is as Scott has said, one of our criteria was that the speaker had to have seen to be giving a good quality talk before. SMACC Chicago was relatively easy to find excellent female speakers in EM/CC. Our focus was international audience and it attracts a global speaker lineup. Personal networks amongst the committee are luckily so extensive that its not hard to reach out to anyone on the planet. The use of social media amplifies the ability to do this. So turning SMACC into a more gender neutral conference… Read more »

Hi Scott I think you are right to credit @First_do_noharm with raising important issues (disclaimer – she is a friend and colleague of mine). As we know – that very discomfort you felt (‘upset’) can sometimes be a defensive response to some unwelcome forced reflection…… at least i have often found that myself… and at best prompts the kind of more indepth thoughts and discussions that Twitter is not good at. I will give further credit to you in presenting this to your large (and adoring 🙂 audience at emcrit.org I also recognize the emotional element of your response – as that’s a little bit of what i feel everytime i look at a conference program/ panel line up that is yet again all men, …… but my emotion is not anger, just kind of sad, resigned, disappointed….. But to remove emotion for a minute….. I guess we have to start with a confronting question – is it actually a good thing to have greater female participation in conversations at professional conferences/seminars large or small. ie What is the evidence that this will make for better patient outcomes/ more rigorous discussions of evidence/ improved translation of evidence to practice. Not… Read more »

Scott,Vic, I have been thinking about this post a lot since it got published. I agree with Scott that the original tweet was somewhat unfair in accusing him of unconscious bias. But what Vic commented on made me think about a wider issue of bias in medical education/meetings and its something I have noticed with SMACC as an example. As I mentioned before SMACC2013 was criticised for gender bias and this was deliberately addressed in the subsequent meetings. SMACC is promoted as inclusive of all, including multidisciplinary attitude, encompassing rural doctors, paramedics , nurses etc. The fact of the matter is that majority of speaker lineup are doctors. There are very few non doctors who speak. This is somewhat made up for via online competitions where participation appears more evenly spread across disciplines. I have even noticed on Twitter and other media the concern that some have that few non doctors are invited to speak at SMACC, since it is billed as a multidisciplinary critical care and social media event. Why dont we have more nurses or paramedics speaking? It might even balance the genders! I guess my point is at some point you have to draw the line at… Read more »

I am so glad to see this discussion up here – hale to you Scott for initiating and hosting, and to the FeminEM team and Simon for their considered input. I have little to add, but to support what Vic has said above. If our starting point is that we agree having female representation is beneficial – to conference goers, to knowledge consumers, to education propagators, and ultimately to patient care, then we need to start to look at the whys, and the hows of rectifying this ‘unconscious bias’. All biases are insidious. This one’s a cultural, as well as an individual, cognitive one. Not only for men mind, but also for women. The first step is its recognition, giving it a name, and affording it respectful airtime and discussion. So thank you all. If I could just add two things: 1) Females in critical care can see this as the doors creaking open. Not a call to arms, but an invitation. You are respected and esteemed and your voice matters. But you need to be putting up your hand and standing strong, so that your valued voice can be heard. 2) It always surprises me the far reaching influence… Read more »