2018 Marie Curie Individual Fellowship (H2020-MSCA-IF-2018)

[lolome]

If you don't address gender you have no chance of getting funded, even if your research is into how moss grows on stones. Its the modern political climate, unfortunately.

Come on! I don't want to believe this!

[danGFSOC]

Projects, reports and evaluation reports I read. A friend of mine was not funded for a 0,1 just for not having mentioned IPR, which was totally irrelevant. The following year she submitted the same project and she got it just there were more funding.

Thanks for your input, this is interesting. What is this based on?

If they don't like enough the project and they do not want to fund it, they will use the missing of gender aspects to bring your score down under the cut off. If they like it, they will not even mention it and you will get the fellowship. Same for other things (IPR, dissemination etc...). So it is not relevant in the first case. It is relevant in the second . They use these details to justify in "Marie Curie terms" a decision that actually is taken on other grounds.

[Bren]

Conspiracy theory or astute observation. Obviously we disagree.

Please don't call me left wing, what an insult!

Sorry bren but this is not correct except in left wing conspiracy theory

If you don't address gender you have no chance of getting funded, even if your research is into how moss grows on stones. Its the modern political climate, unfortunately.

[Aman19]

If add gender aspects is mandatory, than I'm screwed. Not relevant at all for my research... Also, my advisor is a MC evaluator and he told me clearly that it is simply a lottery. We are evaluated by people who probably no nothing about our research topics and it is a matter of them just liking the style rather than the content.

If I don't get this fellowship I haver another one that I'm also waiting to hear back and if nothing works I'm trying something else, I really wanna have a life and not just jump from one place to the other withou knowing my future 2 years ahead. Academia is just impossible these days and unviersities are trying their best to screw us anyway they can with contracts of only 2-5 years.

A friend of mine was rejected on his first try in part also because he didn't address gender aspects even if it was clearly irrelevant to his project. Next year he got it (briefly addressed why this is irrelevant in a paragraph). I did the same following his advice because gender aspects are irrelevant for my project -- I used a paragraph to explain why it is irrelevant to demonstrate that I gave the aspect some thought. I hope this will be enough...

Anyway, I'm in the same boat; waiting for two other applications at the same time and my current contract ends with the end of May (+ a month or two of extension). It's annoying not knowing where life will take me -- or whether I will have to seek a job outside of academia pretty soon.

It is nothing about gender aspects! I always touch those points! you gotta see it, the fund will go to three countries mostly. Reviewers pass the ball to groups which they are familiar with mostly. https://www.theguardian.com/higher-educ ... rizon-2020

[Dajm]

In that case, they should not use the "if relevant" clarification on the application form. "If relevant" means "please, elaborate if so and ignore if otherwise." The interdisciplinary aspect does not have that modifier, making it a mandatory aspect.

If you don't address gender you have no chance of getting funded, even if your research is into how moss grows on stones. Its the modern political climate, unfortunately.

[Bren]

That has no bearing on its truth.

If you don't address gender you have no chance of getting funded, even if your research is into how moss grows on stones. Its the modern political climate, unfortunately.

Come on! I don't want to believe this!

[SOC-2018]

This is one of the shortcomings listed in the "evaluation summary report" of my proposal last year (that was while the topic of my proposed research was remotely, if ever, related to my PhD dissertation):

"Originality and innovative aspects of the research programme are not conclusively demonstrated, as the information on the extent to which
the proposed research action goes beyond the researcher’s PhD dissertation is insufficient."

[Dajm]

Thanks for sharing!

Projects, reports and evaluation reports I read. A friend of mine was not funded for a 0,1 just for not having mentioned IPR, which was totally irrelevant. The following year she submitted the same project and she got it just there were more funding.

Thanks for your input, this is interesting. What is this based on?

If they don't like enough the project and they do not want to fund it, they will use the missing of gender aspects to bring your score down under the cut off. If they like it, they will not even mention it and you will get the fellowship. Same for other things (IPR, dissemination etc...). So it is not relevant in the first case. It is relevant in the second . They use these details to justify in "Marie Curie terms" a decision that actually is taken on other grounds.

[AdinaBabesh]

I think Bren is right. I was also told that the evaluators must see that I thought my proposal from a gender perspective as well, and I reached the conclusion that gender is relevant or not.

I work on archival documents for my research. Have no idea how much gender information I will find there. Therefore, I included this in the risk management, together with a mitigation solution.

If you don't address gender you have no chance of getting funded, even if your research is into how moss grows on stones. Its the modern political climate, unfortunately.

Come on! I don't want to believe this!

[lolome]

I know... I just don't want to accept it!

That has no bearing on its truth.

If you don't address gender you have no chance of getting funded, even if your research is into how moss grows on stones. Its the modern political climate, unfortunately.

Come on! I don't want to believe this!