I often gripe about my minimum wage job at Dave's Cosmic Subs. For instance, were you aware that packaged salami smells like baby diapers? One day I was complaining, yet again, about how my boss had recently given a fellow employee a raise. While yes, the employee works full time (40 hours a week) and has a more complicated job than I do and is much older, I complained anyways. When I slipped in that the employee was a "he", my cousin and aunt automatically decided that it was obvious that he made more money than me because of his gender.
Though this is a specific situation, it makes me question women's actual position in leadership. Could it be possible that this whole time women have spent so much time complaining that they haven't actually taken the time to prove their point?
While there are thousands of papers about the progress of women, almost none of the owmen who are writing such articles are at the top of their fields. Additionally, most women have different priorities. If you look at women and politics, there were almost no laws concerning marriage, children, or education until women began to have a say in politics. Women have stereotypically had a larger emphasis on things as such than men have, which can be a good and a bad thing. I think it is reasonable to ask women to work to prove that their stereotypes are untrue, as all stereotypes must be proven wrong before they can be eliminated. At the same time, men have shorter paternity leaves and often have to fight more to get time off to spend time with their families. There are stereotypes on boths sides of the equation, whcih is why I think that women should stop talking about it and start proving it. This is a true example of how actions speak louder than words.
Monday, March 12, 2012
How Can We Change Society?
One evening at the dinner table my mother told a story about a friend at work. The friend, a woman, was applying for a promotion along with 3 men. At her interview, my mother’s friend was asked, “Don’t you have small children at home? How do you think you’ll manage this job along with your family?” None of the 3 men who were applying for the same job were asked about their families.
When my mother finished telling me this story, I responded, “Why didn’t the woman say something? If she knew she was being treated unfairly, why didn’t she cause some sort of outcry that would draw attention to the matter?”
Sometimes my brain gets a little confused with all this talk of "gender discrepancies in leadership positions" talk. On one hand, I see the statistics and hear people speak in outrage of gender discrimination in the workplace (like with the story of my mother’s friend). On the other hand, however, I don't think I've ever had a personal experience when I felt at a disadvantage (in America, in school or when applying for a leadership role) because of my gender.
Although when I hear the statistics and stories I think, "well this has to change," I think my lack of personal experience impedes my ability to truly understand the fight women face in our country. For example, after I asked my mother why her friend didn’t make her outrage public, my mother shook her head slightly and went back to eating her dinner as if to say “you just don’t get it.”
Until I do understand completely, however, I can only offer this question on the subject: Are women repressed by men in society, or do women repress themselves? By not speaking out about how she was treated unfairly, was my mother’s friend only perpetuating cultural norms of gender discrimination? How many women each day remain silent in the face of repression and discrimination? Maybe my mother’s friend would have appeared as something of a “sore loser” if she made her outrage public, but if every time this type of instance occurred the woman wrote an angry letter to her interviewer’s superior or told everyone she knew, then maybe a cultural shift would occur.
Women cannot expect to be free of gender discrimination by showing statistics of its existence. Nor can women who successfully hold leadership positions adequately rally those who are being repressed or change the ways of their repressors. Change can only happen if women every day stand up in the face of prejudice and demand to be treated as equals. In other words, a successful cultural shift will come from many women pursuing their own personal fight and thus adding strength to the pursuit of equality at large.
In some ways, I am almost hoping for the moment when I feel personally touched by gender discrimination. I can’t wait to cause a fuss, and thus inspire others to do the same.
When my mother finished telling me this story, I responded, “Why didn’t the woman say something? If she knew she was being treated unfairly, why didn’t she cause some sort of outcry that would draw attention to the matter?”
Sometimes my brain gets a little confused with all this talk of "gender discrepancies in leadership positions" talk. On one hand, I see the statistics and hear people speak in outrage of gender discrimination in the workplace (like with the story of my mother’s friend). On the other hand, however, I don't think I've ever had a personal experience when I felt at a disadvantage (in America, in school or when applying for a leadership role) because of my gender.
Although when I hear the statistics and stories I think, "well this has to change," I think my lack of personal experience impedes my ability to truly understand the fight women face in our country. For example, after I asked my mother why her friend didn’t make her outrage public, my mother shook her head slightly and went back to eating her dinner as if to say “you just don’t get it.”
Until I do understand completely, however, I can only offer this question on the subject: Are women repressed by men in society, or do women repress themselves? By not speaking out about how she was treated unfairly, was my mother’s friend only perpetuating cultural norms of gender discrimination? How many women each day remain silent in the face of repression and discrimination? Maybe my mother’s friend would have appeared as something of a “sore loser” if she made her outrage public, but if every time this type of instance occurred the woman wrote an angry letter to her interviewer’s superior or told everyone she knew, then maybe a cultural shift would occur.
Women cannot expect to be free of gender discrimination by showing statistics of its existence. Nor can women who successfully hold leadership positions adequately rally those who are being repressed or change the ways of their repressors. Change can only happen if women every day stand up in the face of prejudice and demand to be treated as equals. In other words, a successful cultural shift will come from many women pursuing their own personal fight and thus adding strength to the pursuit of equality at large.
In some ways, I am almost hoping for the moment when I feel personally touched by gender discrimination. I can’t wait to cause a fuss, and thus inspire others to do the same.
Friday, March 9, 2012
Family or Country: The Decisions of Aung San Suu Kyi
Previous to reading the newest Newsweek, I knew relatively little about Burma. The article, The Lady's Destiny , painted a picture of a politician who had a family, but did not broadcast it. Aung San Suu Kyi is a strikingly beautiful woman who led the Burmese democratic revolution, by chance. She had come to the country to take care of her mother, with a determination to leave as soon as possible and return to Oxford and her family. However, being the daughter of Gen. Aung San, the man who negotiated freedom for his country from England and established the first army, many students and revolutionists were determined to have her participate in the revolution. After hesitation, she took on the role. Her husband had minimal say in the matter, for upon their engagement "she struck a deal: if her people should ever need her, she would have to return to them...and Michael unhesitatingly agreed." (42) Suu Kyi fought for her country and was placed under house arrest as a political prisoner, unable to leave the house even when her husband died of cancer. She has not seen her son, Alexander, since he was 15 years old on a brief trip that her family took to Burma. As the article put it, "few of us could imagine being asked to choose our country over our family, as she has effectively had to do" (42)
In a country where family is used as a prop for campaigns, can anyone in our country actually imagine the consequences of doing that? While Suu Kyi is hailed in Burma as the Mother of Democracy, she is often criticized for choosing her political career before her family. How can we learn to reconcile the two in order for women to progress in society to the same point that men have?
In a country where family is used as a prop for campaigns, can anyone in our country actually imagine the consequences of doing that? While Suu Kyi is hailed in Burma as the Mother of Democracy, she is often criticized for choosing her political career before her family. How can we learn to reconcile the two in order for women to progress in society to the same point that men have?
Tuesday, March 6, 2012
Gender Equality on Boards: Reding or Not, Here it Comes
The gender disparity in the workplace has existed for so long that such a statement should surprise few, if any. Men have always seemed to hold more “higher-end” (board positions) jobs than women have held. However, exactly one year ago, Viviane Reding, justice commissioner for the EU, had asked companies to “voluntarily increase women’s presence on corporate boards.” Yet, after a whole year, the world has seen little change. According to the Huffington Post, 24 companies had promised to dedicate 30% of the board positions to women by 2015. To give a little perspective, Huffington Post also points out that “That’s up only slightly from just under 12 percent in 2010 and despite the fact that 60 percent of university graduates are now women.” In fact, the percentage of women on big company boards has actually declined from 3.4 percent (January 2010) to 3.2. Reding pointed out that women end up benefiting the company rather than costing it money; this statement is supported by the female and male boards who have a “56 percent higher operating profit compared with companies with all-male boards.”
On Monday, March 5th, Viviane Reding demanded a change. Last year she threatened to use quotas if she didn’t see a change, and now the Commission is considering such methods to increase the percentage of women on the boards. Reding states, “I am not fond of quotas, but I very much like what quotas do.”
Countries with quotas already, such as Belgium, France, Italy, the Netherlands and Spain, are the countries that improved the gender gap. The Huffington Post states, “France alone was responsible for half the EU-wide increase, Reding said, bringing its own percentage to 24 percent,” when a year ago, only 12 percent of board positions were held by women. The New York Times points out that, “In Italy, one-third of a company’s board must be women by 2015 or the business will face fines of up to €1 million, or $1.3 million, and the nullification of board elections.”
It’d be wrong to assume that Reding’s initiative was unpopular and ill received. The NYT also says that “Ms. Reding said she had the support of many members of the European Parliament, which had already backed the need for legislation if companies failed to make sufficient progress through self-regulation” in addition to the “new poll showing that 75 percent of respondents favored legislation to balance gender representation on company boards.”
So from now until May 28th, “consultations” will help “determine the proportion of women that should be on boards under any E.U.-wide legislation” and the techniqualities of the quotas. Do you feel that Reding has so far dealt with the inequality issue in an appropriate way (was threatening quotas one year ago necessary and or the right thing to do)? Do you think these quotas will be enforced? Will such an attempt to create gender equality change society’s view of women?
Monday, March 5, 2012
Sunday, March 4, 2012
Hundreds demonstrate for women's rights at state Capitol, 31 arrested
On Saturday 31 protesters were arrested at the state Capital in Virginia. The protest was in response to the proposed bill that women would have to undergo a mandatory ultra-sound if they wanted an abortion. Some of the protesters held signs such as "Gov. McDonnell get out of my vagina,". 17 women and 14 men were arrested and though the charges are unknown it was said that they were probably charged with "trespassing or unlawful assembly". The protesters were arrested and taken to a bus where some waited for 5 hours before they were taken to a correctional facility.
The protesters explained their views stating "The legislators should not be legislating medical procedures, especially for women, We have a freedom of choice and they're trying to take that away." Many women believed that the force used by the police was not needed and unnecessary, for they were only practicing their freedom of speech. The police of the Capital stated that the police force was called because they believed that the demonstration was "getting really large and we didn't want things to get out of hand," Leigh Weedon a participator in the protester stated "I was incredibly proud of the people that were arrested on the stairs. I thought that was a great sacrifice, and I was very proud of them doing that," Weedon said. "I was also really surprised today with the presence of the SWAT team, obviously, and the German shepherds."
I used this article because it reminded me so much of "Jawed Iron Angels" because of how the women were protesting against the government, yet they were arrested under the same "crimes" as they were. My question to the class is "Has the US really progressed as a country as far as women rights?" though the Obama administration doe snot support the the bill, his views and support was still neglected and people were still arrested. In the coming up election if the republicans were to become the majority in politics would that potentially become a problem for basic human rights?
The protesters explained their views stating "The legislators should not be legislating medical procedures, especially for women, We have a freedom of choice and they're trying to take that away." Many women believed that the force used by the police was not needed and unnecessary, for they were only practicing their freedom of speech. The police of the Capital stated that the police force was called because they believed that the demonstration was "getting really large and we didn't want things to get out of hand," Leigh Weedon a participator in the protester stated "I was incredibly proud of the people that were arrested on the stairs. I thought that was a great sacrifice, and I was very proud of them doing that," Weedon said. "I was also really surprised today with the presence of the SWAT team, obviously, and the German shepherds."
I used this article because it reminded me so much of "Jawed Iron Angels" because of how the women were protesting against the government, yet they were arrested under the same "crimes" as they were. My question to the class is "Has the US really progressed as a country as far as women rights?" though the Obama administration doe snot support the the bill, his views and support was still neglected and people were still arrested. In the coming up election if the republicans were to become the majority in politics would that potentially become a problem for basic human rights?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)