The Matilda effect descri­bes the sys­te­ma­tic discri­mi­na­ti­on of fema­le sci­en­tists. Its name stems from Matilda Joslyn Gage, a femi­nist and socio­lo­gist, who oppo­sed the widespread sen­ti­ment that women were not sui­ta­ble for sci­en­ti­fic work. This arti­cle will high­light some of the extra­or­di­na­ry sci­en­ti­fic achie­ve­ments and con­tri­bu­ti­ons made by women in science.

The work of bio­che­mist Rosalind Franklin repres­ents one of the best examp­les for the Matilda effect. She focu­sed her stu­dies at the London King’s College on deco­ding DNA with the help of roent­gen radia­ti­on. Franklin dis­co­vers two types of DNA mole­cu­les, mana­ges to take high-qua­li­ty pic­tures, and dis­co­vers the exis­tence of a helix structure. 

Photo 51, B Form
KDBP/1/1/867, King’s College London Archives

Meanwhile, the two (male) sci­en­tists Watson and Crick crea­te a first faul­ty DNA model after atten­ding one of Franklin’s pre­sen­ta­ti­ons. Maurice Wilkins, vice head of the labo­ra­to­ry in which Franklin was working, secret­ly copied her docu­ments and pas­sed tho­se to them. Among them was the famous Photo 51 — the evi­dence pro­ving the exis­tence of the dou­ble helix struc­tu­re. Additionally, the report of her fin­dings was also pas­sed to Watson and Crick without her know­ledge by a mem­ber of the assess­ment com­mit­tee, which gave them the necessa­ry data for their model. They publis­hed their work in the same jour­nal as Franklin’s report, which was inter­pre­ted as veri­fi­ca­ti­on. Four years after Franklin’s death, Watson and Crick recei­ved a Nobel Prize for this dis­co­very. Neither she nor her con­tri­bu­ti­ons find any ack­now­ledgment in their accep­t­ance speech. Years later Watson, in his book “The Double Helix”, admit­ted to how much the team pro­fi­ted off of her work but rather than tal­king about her work, he com­men­ted on her appearan­ce:
“By choice she did not empha­si­ze her femi­ni­ne qua­li­ties. Though her fea­tures were strong, she was not unat­trac­ti­ve and might have been qui­te stun­ning had she taken even a mild inte­rest in clothes. This she did not.”

NASA rese­arch mathe­ma­ti­ci­an Katherine Johnson, 1960

One small step for a human …

As the only fema­le stu­dent taking Analytical Geometry, Katherine Johnson gra­dua­ted with a Bachelor of Science in Mathematics and French at the age of 18. She got the oppor­tu­ni­ty to be one of the three first Black peop­le who were allo­wed to stu­dy at an American public uni­ver­si­ty, and is the third Afro-American per­son to obtain a doc­to­ra­te degree in Mathematics. Later, Johnson starts working for the NACA, the pre­de­ces­sor of NASA. During the segre­ga­ti­on, the “ren­ting out” of Black mathe­ma­ti­ci­ans to other depart­ments was com­mon prac­ti­ce. She is the first to insist on being allo­wed into the brie­fings of the depart­ment of avia­ti­on rese­arch. Johnson is the only woman who mana­ges to tran­si­ti­on to ano­t­her depart­ment, as her exper­ti­se quick­ly made her indis­pensable. Prompted by a defi­cit in text­books on space tra­vel, she and a male col­le­ge wro­te a sci­en­ti­fic paper and she con­se­quent­ly beco­mes the first woman to be credi­ted as a co-aut­hor in the depart­ment. That paper ser­ves as the foun­da­ti­on for NASA’s first man­ned space tra­vel and enab­led the first com­ple­te orbi­t­ing of Earth by an American astro­naut among other things. Furthermore, Johnson cal­cu­la­ted the cor­rect flight path and orbit for the Apollo 11 mis­si­on, deve­lo­ped a manu­al navi­ga­ti­on sys­tem and made cal­cu­la­ti­ons essen­ti­al for the return of the Apollo 13 back to earth. Besides count­less awards from NASA, Johnson recei­ves the Presidential Medal of Freedom from then-President Obama in 2015, one of the hig­hest civil hono­urs in the USA.

… one giant leap for humanity

Margaret Hamilton next to prin­ted lis­tings of the space program’s gui­d­ance soft­ware she has deve­lo­ped Draper

When thin­king of Apollo 11 and the moon lan­ding of July 20 1969, most peop­le think of the three male crew mem­bers — Neil Armstrong, Buzz Aldrin, and Michael Collins. Few are awa­re of the role that Margaret Hamilton play­ed. The mathe­ma­ti­ci­an is con­si­de­red to be the first soft­ware engi­neer and was respon­si­ble for the deve­lo­p­ment of the flight soft­ware. This was essen­ti­al for the navi­ga­ti­on to the moon and back, as well as the suc­cess­ful lan­ding. She deve­lo­ped con­cepts for asyn­chro­nous soft­ware, which enab­led the exe­cu­ti­on of several ope­ra­ti­ons at once without blo­cking others, and methods for a prio­ri­ty gui­ded task exe­cu­ti­on. Hamilton reli­ed on the har­mo­nis­ed inter­ac­tion of hard­ware, soft­ware, and humans, which allows the pilot to take con­trol at any time. Occasionally, the working mother brought her daugh­ter to MIT. When she acci­dent­al­ly pushed a but­ton causing a sys­tem crash, Hamilton advo­ca­ted for the instal­la­ti­on of pro­tec­ti­ve devices and back­up sys­tems. Contrary to the popu­lar belief that astro­nauts do not make mista­kes, the same mista­ke hap­pen­ed during the Apollo 8 mis­si­on, which was fixed in very litt­le time by her team. The lan­ding of the lunar modu­le during Apollo 11 was inter­rup­ted by an error mes­sa­ge and clo­se to can­cel­la­ti­on. But Hamilton’s soft­ware was able to hand­le the addi­tio­nal amount of data cau­sed by the unplan­ned acti­va­ti­on of a radar sys­tem, thanks to her prio­ri­ti­sa­ti­on sys­tem. After the con­clu­si­on of the Apollo pro­gram, she foun­ded her own soft­ware com­pa­ny and recei­ved several awards; among them was the high­ly endo­wed Exceptional Space Act Award, the hig­hest award ever given by NASA, and the Presidential Medal of Freedom.

Henrietta Lacks around 1945, befo­re her death from cer­vi­cal can­cer in 1951 

Immortal cells

Cell and tis­sue dona­ti­ons are indis­pensable for sci­ence. HeLa cells are of par­ti­cu­lar medi­cal rele­van­ce. They are used to rese­arch can­cer drugs, deve­lo­ping vac­ci­nes, and in stu­dent edu­ca­ti­on, among other things, and are par­ti­cu­lar­ly well known for their unli­mi­ted capa­ci­ty of cell divi­si­on. Although they are one of the first and most fre­quent­ly used cell lines in bio­me­di­cal rese­arch, their ori­gin remai­ned a mys­te­ry for a long time. HeLa cells ori­gi­na­te from invol­un­ta­ry tis­sue remo­val. They were taken from the young African-American woman and mother Henrietta Lacks after she lost her batt­le against a par­ti­cu­lar­ly aggres­si­ve form of cer­vi­cal can­cer, just eight mon­ths after she was dia­gno­sed. This hap­pens without her know­ledge or con­sent. Her fami­ly also does not find out about the invol­un­ta­ry tis­sue remo­val for almost 20 years. The cells were irra­dia­ted and gene­ti­cal­ly mani­pu­la­ted — her cell’s suc­cess sto­ry begins. Today, an esti­ma­ted 50 mil­li­on ton­nes of HeLa cells are still ‘ali­ve’ in labo­ra­to­ries around the world and are still used for basic rese­arch. Henrietta Lack’s cells have repor­ted­ly been used in more than 70,000 medi­cal studies.

Sit and watch in silence?

Microbiologist Elisabeth Bik has iden­ti­fied mani­pu­la­ted images in hund­reds of sci­en­ti­fic articles.

For the Dutch micro-bio­lo­gist Elisabeth Bik, the ans­wer is defi­ni­te­ly “no”. In her work she con­cen­tra­tes on bac­te­ri­al gene­tics and micro­bio­me rese­arch, Bik got famous for unco­vering sci­en­ti­fic mal­prac­ti­ce rela­ting to image mani­pu­la­ti­on in sci­en­ti­fic publi­ca­ti­ons. The whist­le blower review­ed over twen­ty thousand papers in dif­fe­rent jour­nals and dis­co­ve­r­ed that near­ly 1 out 25 papers shows mani­pu­la­ted wes­tern blots. After let­ters to rese­ar­chers and edi­tors were left unans­we­red, she and two of her col­leagues publis­hed a paper on sci­en­ti­fic mis­con­duct in 2016 and cam­pai­gned to ensu­re the credi­bi­li­ty of sci­en­ti­fic rese­arch. Her work has con­tri­bu­t­ed to the dis­co­very of fal­si­fied or dupli­ca­ted images in stu­dies on the tre­at­ment of Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s dise­a­se. She shares her rese­arch on X and her blog (scienceintegritydigest.com), among other pla­ces. In 2024, Bik recei­ved the Einstein Foundation’s Institutional Award for her work.

Blotting
In mole­cu­lar bio­lo­gy, blot­ting refers to a pro­cess for trans­fer­ring mole­cu­les onto a mem­bra­ne. The Western Blot descri­bes the trans­fer of pro­te­ins onto a car­ri­er mem­bra­ne, which are detec­ted by sub­se­quent reactions.

Germany’s first female doctor

As the daugh­ter of a doc­tor and grammar school tea­cher, Dorothea Erxleben, born in Quedlinburg in 1715, recei­ved the same school edu­ca­ti­on as her youn­ger bro­thers, which stood in con­trast to the social stan­dards of the time. She taught herself most of her know­ledge, inclu­ding Latin, and accom­pa­nied her father on medi­cal visits at the age of 16. Although she was denied the oppor­tu­ni­ty to stu­dy medi­ci­ne, her father allo­wed her to assist in his prac­ti­ce. In 1740, she asked the new King Frederick II for per­mis­si­on to attend uni­ver­si­ty. Her request was gran­ted and she was enrol­led in the University of Halle. However, she was never able to stu­dy, as her bro­ther, without whom she would not be able to attend lec­tures, was draf­ted into the war. She’s even­tual­ly mar­ried, had child­ren and con­ti­nued to work as a doc­tor in her father’s prac­ti­ce, which she took over after his death in 1747.

Institutions named after the phy­si­ci­an Dorothea Erxleben inclu­de a lear­ning cent­re at University Medicine Halle (Saale).

As Erxleben did not have a medi­cal degree, male col­leagues repor­ted her for medi­cal mal­prac­ti­ce after the death of a pati­ent, whe­reu­pon she was ban­ned from being a doc­tor. She pro­tes­ted against the ban and com­ple­ted her doc­to­ra­te by sub­mit­ting her the­sis. In 1754, Erxleben beca­me the first woman in Germany to be awar­ded a medi­cal doc­to­ra­te. She also cri­ti­ci­zed the usa­ge of expen­si­ve “trend drugs” and with that oppo­ses the gene­ral direc­tion of her era’s medi­cal deve­lo­p­ment. In the socie­ty of her life­time, her vita is a tre­men­dous out­lier. High School clas­ses for women were first offe­red in 1893, while ent­ry to German uni­ver­si­ties was only made pos­si­ble after legis­la­tu­re pas­sed the Federal Council in 1899.

The his­to­ries of the­se and count­less other women show that neit­her sex, nor ori­gin, nor sexu­al iden­ti­ty has influ­ence over ones abi­li­ties. The pro­blem of ‘invi­si­bi­li­sa­ti­on’ of women and mino­ri­ties can be obser­ved not only in the natu­ral sci­en­ces, but in almost every field of life. By drawing atten­ti­on to for­got­ten and oppres­sed peop­le and their histo­ry, and by reco­gnis­ing their achie­ve­ments, a reapp­rai­sal and a chan­ge in the social norm can take place.

Text: Sarah Becker
Translation: Jonne Pietryas

0 0 vote
Article Rating
Abonnieren
Benachrichtige mich bei
guest

Diese Website verwendet Akismet, um Spam zu reduzieren. Erfahre mehr darüber, wie deine Kommentardaten verarbeitet werden.

0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments