What kind of teaching are you wanting to do? General undergrad biomedical science?

So don't feel that thinking positive thoughts is all there is to it. And don’t feel as if you must push yourself to teach. Teaching isn't for everyone and there's absolutely nothing wrong with that. There’s nothing wrong with keeping up with it as long as you’re learning something each time you get up to the lectern. There no point to torturing yourself for no reason if you’re not learning something.

Here's my two cents – people don’t normally get over their self-esteem issues overnight, it takes time. Sometimes it takes a very long time, so learn to embrace it in the meantime. Accept the fact you currently lack self-confidence just like a million other people out there. You’re definitely not alone in this. Accept that you may struggle with teaching while you find your footing, and understand that you will likely receive criticism, just like everyone else in whatever job they’ve got. Accept that you’re going to feel down from time to time, it’s normal. All that talk in a previous post in this thread about putting positive thoughts in your head as a way to deal with things can sometimes be a form of denial or lack of acknowledgement that there is something else underneath.

I'm always one to encourage people to go out on a limb and try things which they don't normally do. In your case I applaud the fact that you've persisted with teaching in spite of your lack of self-confidence. I’ve always had issues with public-speaking myself, even though I’ve done a bit of it I’ve never gotten over the nerves. And that’s how it is for a lot of people including the most unlikely individuals like Billy Connolly (yes even the Big Yin himself).

The field of dentistry, or medical research in the field of dentistry, is an area that will generally require a PhD, or a dentistry degree plus a few years of post-grad professional experience.

PhD students in this area usually get into tutorial or undergrad lab class supervision, that kind of thing. But that can be an interesting experience with which to build your teaching expertise up to the kind of full-blown undergrad or postgrad lectures you may be required to do after you earn your PhD.

There has been many a graduate, who have wanted to give a gift-wrapped package that ticks to their supervisor upon completion of their PhD obligations.

Read through the prescribed or recommended texts in the subject/course and then hope to god that you don't get any smartass know-it-all students in your class who will try to interject during your lecture to try and show you up.

I've known at least one academic who was a colleague of mine put in similar circumstances as you. He was a post-doc though, and the topic was 'loosely' (very loosely) within the vicinity of his research background.

Actually I wasn't trying to say forget about the gender discrimination issue. I'm a bit vague on about this because sometimes it's really not worth facing the uphill battle when you could easily find another supervisor in another place where you'll be treated with more respect.

It could very well be that the anonymous reviewer is working on producing similar results in your paper and is feeling frustrated that you've managed to put it in paper first. That's politics for you. Or it could simply be that the reviewer is a downright arrogant egotistical dick.

What area are you doing your PhD in?

Nothing, absolutely nothing else is more effective as a learning aid, than actually going to the native country and living there for at least a few weeks.

I think it's still a bit different when you've got to deal with arrogance and prejudice every day. I imagine it would be heavily taxing on one's sanity.

Not much you can say to that unfortunately, if you don't have a support system of people in similar circumstances there. Of course if you know how to play the game, there are probably subtle ways to get ahead.

But I often hear stories of people battling the odds and coming out on top, and what do they usually say in the end? They something along the lines of:

"I had to work ten times harder than everyone else to prove that I could succeed in their world because I'm *take your pick* black/female/poor/fat/suffer from ADD/gay/muslim/only have one foot/ugly/likes to wear female underwear/vegan...".

It's almost a cliche now.

They don't say outright that it's not allowed because it is a sensitive issue, and not because they 'may' allow such things. And whether you consider yourself staff or not, if you read the excerpts they refer to, and described staff-staff relationships as well.

I'm not against staff-staff or student-staff relationships but it IS serious professional conduct in the way that katq described it where people doing PhDs are openly allowed to be in a relationship with their supervisors, even going so far as to say it made 'interesting gossip' which sounds like she's completely oblivious to the seriousness of her claims.

This isn't about cultural difference or political incorrectness or sexual harrassment as you described in your 'american' scenario. This is about professional conduct, the standard of which is the same no matter where you are.

Just another observation - there are also notoriously few women doing engineering, much less a PhD in engineering. But there are a few women there.

The difference between engineering and business is that the presence of women is much more appreciated in engineering than in business. I get the impression the guys tend to be more arrogant in business.