A few months ago, a new term cropped up on Twitter to describe an all-too-common phenomenon at academic institutions: a dude wall. In science departments, these walls honor historical figures by portraying retired faculty, previous heads of an institution, or even just preeminent scientists in a field. But they’ve been attracting negative attention for their lack of diversity—almost all the portraits are white, male scientists. Students from underrepresented backgrounds report that such institutional portraiture stands at odds with their schools’ stated values of diversity and inclusion and can lead to lower self-esteem (J. Gen. Internal Med. 2019, DOI: 10.1007/s11606-019-05138-9).
As a result of the conversations happening both on- and off-line, many universities are changing their portrait walls. But the idea of taking down dude walls—and the term itself—has also stirred up controversy. Some see the dismantling of these walls as downplaying historical advances made by white, male scientists. The term dude wall has also come under fire for potentially alienating male allies who might otherwise agree with the idea that these walls should be changed. The term, says University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign chemist Jeffrey Moore, “turns up the heat on the whole conversation.” In addition, those committed to dismantling these walls must walk a line between inclusivity and erasure, especially when the wall celebrates past leaders of an institution as opposed to influential scientists