Is There Opposition to Women in Pharmacy?
New York, N. Y., September 9th, 1912.
To the Editor of The Druggists Circular:
As I have not read all the discussion in the Circular concerning women in pharmacy, it may be that in this communication I shall mention something already said. However, the waste basket may be open for this letter in case I do impose in such a way.
Although an admirer of Mrs. St. Claire Rainsford, and agreeing with her in the main in her article in the Circular for August, page 471, I regret that I must disagree with her in regard to the following statement.
She says: The societies [pharmaceutical organizations] neither care for nor encourage the attendance of women at their meetings, or else why the female branches of certain organizations ?
Some women regardless of mere man’s opinions, do go to these meetings in the hope of being educated by some of the masculine wisdom dispensed thereat, but they are never recognized nor asked to discuss a paper.
As far as women pharmacists have told me of their experience with societies, it seems that Mrs. Ransford Gay's statements are not in accord with the facts. I can mention in particular the American Pharmaceutical Association, as it is a very large and important one. The officers and members often insist upon women friends of theirs who are in the profession becoming members of the organization. I have received four application blanks with requests that I join. Other women whom I know have also been urged to join. I and other friends have received notices of the monthly meetings.
Prof. George C. Diekman, chairman of the New York branch, a few months ago, especially visited a meeting of the American Womens Pharmaceutical Association to extend a cordial invitation to the members to attend meetings of the branch.
Most of the members attended the meeting; which followed that of the women’s organization. We were very cordially received and made to feel during the meeting that we were sincerely welcome.
I am quite sure that many women can give similar expressions of the cordiality and encouragement offered to them to attend meetings and become members of other organizations.
As to reading papers: I am quite certain that we shall receive requests to read them whenever the officers know that we have something to say. It is not a very useful thing to ask everyone an officer or programme committee should meet to read a paper. There must be some reason to believe the man or woman has something to say before an invitation to address a meeting is extended.
Why the female branches of certain organizations? Of course, in some cases there may be reasons peculiar to the organization, but in general, women as a class do not hold the same points of view or go about the affairs of societies in the same way as men.
In a general way we might say that men are more broadminded. I mean by this they have had opportunities to get broader world experience, and therefore their actions in an organization are influenced by such experience.
Women feel more at ease in their separate bodies than with the men. It seems that it is only a transitional stage in woman’s development which she will pass through as she becomes more familiar with the broader sphere and will then work shoulder to shoulder with man.
And, too, there are certain functions now that women’s organizations can perform, such as giving mutual support in their efforts to overcome the obstacles of tradition and prejudice against women entering this field; educating the public to the usefulness of women in pharmacy ; and in encouraging women to enter their profession.
This brings me to the reasons for the opposition to women in pharmacy.
The reasons peculiar to this profession, because other fields are open to them, for not welcoming her to it are mainly the old traditional prejudices against woman leaving the home, and against her entering a new field. Both will be overcome when woman demonstrates, as she is doing, her ability satisfactorily to meet all conditions in this field.
The druggist is gradually seeing that the general public does not object to a woman in his store; moreover, many women patrons prefer to deal with a woman pharmacist; and what is more influencing to the druggist at present, she can be employed for less than a man.
As to her qualifications as a pharmacist, a woman has greater capacity for detail and is more conscientious in small matters than a man, so that it is only a question of time until she will be welcomed in this profession as much as she is in industrial lines.
(signed) Roddie Minor, Phar. D
The Druggists Circular, Vol. 56, 1912 page 628
