The December 2022 issue of IEEE Spectrum is here!

Close bar

We Need to Support Our LGBT Community

Talented colleagues are hiding under an invisibility cloak

3 min read
Shadows of people standing in line overlayed with a rainbow.
Photo: iStockphoto

THE INSTITUTEIt would be a dream to make the perfect invisibility cloak, one that works at all wavelengths, delivers ultralow loss performance, and is compact, flexible, portable, and (virtually) free. The recipe for that cloak is known. The physics of such cloaks lie not in metamaterials and electromagnetic cloaking, nor a clever application of epsilon near-zero materials, and not even artful exploitation of ultrawide bandgaps. The recipe is simple—like all scientists I refer to the technique perfected with much pain as “simple” to be lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, or intersex (LGBTQI; sometimes expressed as GLBTQI). LGBT people are invisible because of the largely heteronormative nature of our society, especially within the science, technology, engineering, and math fields.

Countries are ruling that discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation is a fundamental violation of rights. India was the latest country to issue such a ruling. Countries also are legalizing same-sex marriage. In our lifetime we are seeing a change from homosexuality being a crime to being legal.

Even though more countries are changing their laws, homosexuality is still illegal in several and is not socially acceptable in others—which makes it scary for LGBT people who live there. The risks are real: death in extreme cases, although the loss of a job and social ostracism are more common.

THE STEM COMMUNITY

Within the scientific and engineering community, those who are LGBT are almost invisible, even though they make up about 10 percent of the population. The irony that light and invisibility go hand in glove is incredible. This hiding in plain sight and invisibility is being helped along by all of us within the science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) community.

There are few LGBT scientists, educators, or researchers in the photonics and optics fields who have disclosed their sexual orientation. I can think of almost no one. Because there are so few LGBT role models, it is that much harder for young people with those sexual orientations who want to pursue a STEM career to see themselves as successful engineers and scientists. Traditionally conservative professions, like banking, law, and accounting, have made efforts to be inclusive of their LGBT employees and have created programs to attract young LGBT people into their professions, but we in STEM ignore their presence.

Within the scientific community, which is also largely conservative, coming out can mean facing censure or even outright prejudice. Making an inherent aspect of LGBT people’s very nature invisible becomes the “safe” thing to do.

MAKING ASSUMPTIONS

We are used to assuming everyone is straight, so that becomes the dominant narrative. During sessions about issues that affect underrepresented groups, for example, the topic of partners struggling with career issues assumes that couples are composed of male-female partners. The idea that same-sex couples might be facing similar problems doesn’t come up. The complications and heartache caused by their relationship not being legally recognized in many countries—and how that limits their choices, careers, and lives—is never discussed.

When the discussion moves to the impact that raising children has on one’s career, the assumption again is that straight women are the ones having children and facing problems. But LGBT couples who want to have children face other issues—such as in vitro fertilization, surrogacy, and adoption—things that not all straight couples have to think about. In many diversity events I’ve attended and articles I’ve read, there is scant mention of the issues that LGBT folks face. It’s no wonder that LGBT people feel alienated.

Take, for example, the British mathematician Alan Turing. He helped crack the German Enigma code and therefore shortened World War II by an estimated two years, but he was branded a criminal because he was gay. He was chemically castrated, and he committed suicide. The British government posthumously pardoned him, and Hollywood celebrated his work in The Imitation Game.

The pardon is welcome and so is the recognition of Turing’s genius and the wrong that was done to him. Yet I can’t help but think that, given a choice, Turing would have preferred to live to a grand old age with his husband, teaching and researching quantum cryptography during the week and visiting with his grandkids on the weekend. We, as a society, also would have benefited from the additional research he would have conducted.

We can choose to learn from Turing’s case and stop forcing our LGBT talent to hide under an invisibility cloak. An environment where everyone is not assumed to be straight would be a good start.

Senior Member Arti Agrawal is an associate professor at the University of Technology, Sydney. She is director of the university’s Women in Engineering and IT program, an associate editor of the IEEE Photonics Journal and associate vice president of diversity for the IEEE Photonics Society.

The Conversation (2)
Daniel Pawlak12 Nov, 2022
LM

Using Turing’s experience as a bludgeon to beat down anti-LGBT sentiment is disingenuous. Turing’s suicide is not a forgone conclusion, since new data has come to light. And, he appeared to be quite happy near the end of of his life. Regardless, that was then, and today’s LGBT community is vastly different from Turing’s day. The insistence that straight people need to accept LGBT behavior is totally out of line. LGBT people need to live their lives as they see fit, and if they are harassed or discriminated against in the workplace, there are now avenues by which those situations can be remedied. Put “feelings” of being the victim behind you and get to work. Work based on merit is essential in today’s business world. All personal issues of the workforce should be considered, but ranked much, much, much lower in importance than it currently is.

Jane Berrie12 Jul, 2022
M

Interesting to read this. I am a happy transgender employee but I waited a very long time to be completely open about who I am - until I was in my 60s. It has been a great relief to do so. Despite almost daily transphobic misinformation in UK mass media, and attacks by some politicians, we have become so common in everyday life that we are no longer considered exotic or remarkable by intelligent, modern people. It is very apparent that millennial and younger colleagues require no adaptation to see us as normal. As for labels, I do not bother with them. The way I present myself, and my name, make it completely clear how I want to be addressed, and what my pronouns are, etc. There is no need or reason to elaborate. Perhaps surprisingly, the private sector seems in general a more enlightened environment - maybe because they rank productivity (and hence profitability) above "how we do things round here" and personal agendas.

Get unlimited IEEE Spectrum access

Become an IEEE member and get exclusive access to more stories and resources, including our vast article archive and full PDF downloads
Get access to unlimited IEEE Spectrum content
Network with other technology professionals
Establish a professional profile
Create a group to share and collaborate on projects
Discover IEEE events and activities
Join and participate in discussions

Economics Drives Ray-Gun Resurgence

Laser weapons, cheaper by the shot, should work well against drones and cruise missiles

4 min read
In an artist’s rendering, a truck is shown with five sets of wheels—two sets for the cab, the rest for the trailer—and a box on the top of the trailer, from which a red ray is projected on an angle, upward, ending in the silhouette of an airplane, which is being destroyed

Lockheed Martin's laser packs up to 300 kilowatts—enough to fry a drone or a plane.

Lockheed Martin

The technical challenge of missile defense has been compared with that of hitting a bullet with a bullet. Then there is the still tougher economic challenge of using an expensive interceptor to kill a cheaper target—like hitting a lead bullet with a golden one.

Maybe trouble and money could be saved by shooting down such targets with a laser. Once the system was designed, built, and paid for, the cost per shot would be low. Such considerations led planners at the Pentagon to seek a solution from Lockheed Martin, which has just delivered a 300-kilowatt laser to the U.S. Army. The new weapon combines the output of a large bundle of fiber lasers of varying frequencies to form a single beam of white light. This laser has been undergoing tests in the lab, and it should see its first field trials sometime in 2023. General Atomics, a military contractor in San Diego, is also developing a laser of this power for the Army based on what’s known as the distributed-gain design, which has a single aperture.

Keep Reading ↓Show less