tip off

The political leader who told women to ignore gender discrimination

Just ignore it and it will go away. It’s the kind of advice a parent might give an angst-ridden teenager with a humiliatingly large spot on their face. It’s not how you would expect a modern political leader to answer a question about how to respond to gender discrimination in 2012.

Asked on Monday for advice by a woman who said she was experiencing discrimination from older males in her position as a local councillor, state opposition leader Isobel Redmond’s comments read like something out of a 1950s manual for good housewives. Redmond told the Committee for Economic Development of Australia women’s leadership lunch:

Listen a lot and rather than talking a lot, ask lots of questions, preferably intelligent questions, to get the discussion to go the way you want it. I don’t think there’s much point in confrontation. I think it is easier a lot of the time to just try to ignore the discrimination and get on with being the best councillor you can be, or the best whatever it is, and ask intelligent questions and make gentle suggestions and I think you’ll find the discrimination will just disappear.”

The suggestion that ignoring gender discrimination will make it disappear is, frankly, astounding — especially when it comes from someone who might be considered a role model for young women.

If such pacifism had prevailed over the past century, it is highly unlikely women would ever have gained the right to vote, nor any semblance of pay parity. It is only by actively challenging discrimination that improvements have also been made in the rights of those with disabilities, racial minorities or gay people.

There are some who support Redmond’s sentiments, arguing that women should not be asking for “special treatment” or “tokenism”. Such arguments are often also used to discredit those advocating for minority groups, but — whether by accident or intent — they miss the point.

The key issue is that most women are not asking for special treatment, merely equal treatment. They want to be judged on merit, not gender. They should not have to be better or more intelligent than their male counterparts, nor should they have to work harder, just to be treated equally.

Perhaps most insulting of all is the idea that they should make “gentle suggestions” and “listen a lot rather than talking a lot”. Heaven forbid a woman might be assertive and outspoken —  traits that often see men viewed as confident and competent, but can result in women being labelled aggressive.

Like Redmond, there will be many women who have left a job where they suffered discrimination, rather making an official complaint or seeking legal redress. This is understandable, especially given the fear of long-term career repercussions. However, “moving on” does nothing to change s-xist attitudes and unfair practices. Nor is it an option for many women whose employment choices are reduced by their limited education or skills.

Confronting gender discrimination is difficult, but those who have the courage to do so can effect meaningful change in a workplace. This may be through alerting employers to an ingrained gender bias they were not previously aware of, challenging an unhealthy workplace culture, or through legal action that reinforces the fact that anti-discrimination laws must be obeyed.

Two years ago, on the anniversary of the signing of the 1975 SA S-x Discrimination Act, I spoke to Anne Levy, one of the state’s first four female MPs. She recounted how she had made a submission to a parliamentary select committee in the ’70s outlining some of the ways in which she and other women were discriminated against, including the fact that she couldn’t get a bank loan without a guarantee from her husband, even though she earned more money than him.

On her first tour of Parliament, Levy was told by a clerk she would have no need to see the members’ bar because only the men used it: “I was so irritated by this that at the first opportunity I went into the bar … I think I only ordered a coffee but I made my point!”

Thank God for people like Levy. They have driven change — not through ignoring discrimination, but by tackling it head-on.

Just under a third of SA parliamentarians are now women. We have come a long way in the past 50 years, but there is still a long way to go before we have full gender equality.

If Redmond is convinced that “natural process” will get us there, one wonders how committed she would be, if the Liberals won government, to retaining a minister for the status of women and a state commissioner for equal opportunity.

My fear is that gender equality progress nationally will stagnate — or even be eroded — due to complacency fuelled by a belief that discrimination is no longer a concern (it is; it’s just more insidious) and by a reluctance of women to confront it.

One of the more bizarre examples of the attitude of some employers was highlighted in a recent Fairfax article by columnist Nina Funnell about an investment banking firm that demanded its female traders (yes, only the women) attend a training seminar where they were advised how to dress — including wearing lipstick and high heels.

I hope someone made a gentle and intelligent suggestion regarding what they might really like to do with those heels. Or perhaps they just ignored the whole thing in the hope it would go away.

*This article was first published at InDaily

4
  • 1
    James K
    Posted Wednesday, 23 May 2012 at 5:45 pm | Permalink

    Well said Suzie.

    One of the great stumbling blocks to continued progress in women’s
    rights, can be complacent women who are happy with the position
    they are now in.

    It is not the biggest of all stumbling blocks (men still take that poll
    position) but it is a hurdle nonetheless.

    Good article highlighting it.

  • 2
    AR
    Posted Wednesday, 23 May 2012 at 11:10 pm | Permalink

    JK - that would be pole position.
    To paraphrase Bevin, “not whilst some men ain’t dead”, it is unfortunately true that “some women are their sisters’ worst enemies”.
    hi Bettina A!

  • 3
    bluepoppy
    Posted Thursday, 24 May 2012 at 11:59 am | Permalink

    AR
    Much of Bettina Arndt’s advice is intentionally misconstrued by people with their own agenda looking for a straw-woman or whipping post to give their cause impetus.

    As for the article, nobody should have to put up with ill treatment or discrimination but I think it is up to each individual to choose how to handle the situation with or without counselling as they decide.

    Too many times complainants end up being treated poorly. They become the enemy and the psychological effects can be overwhelming. In some cases the problem can be handled in-house but my experience in the public service is that the complainant poses a problem to the reputation of the department rather than the perpetrator and complaints are often handled with that mindset.

    It is just too simple to insist every woman has to do their bit for the cause or for the greater good when the individual impacts can be, in the worst cases, devastating.

  • 4
    notmensa
    Posted Thursday, 24 May 2012 at 12:50 pm | Permalink

    @bluepoppy - I completely agree.
    Having watched others actually make complaints of bullying and discrimination in the public service, I’ve seen how poorly the complainants are treated and how devastating it ends up being for the individual/s involved.

    Making a formal bullying / harrassment / discrimination complaint requires you to articulate quite clearly how you want the matter resolved - do you want the perpetrator disciplined, moved or removed? Do you want to be moved to a different position or report to a different manager?
    Whether any of these options are even realistic differs depending on the organisation, its culture, and the people involved. Cases I’ve seen have involved highly specialised positions in the only (small) team in the state offering the service, with managers who had been working together for 20 odd years. There is simply no way they would be moved or removed without very, very compelling evidence.

    For Isobel Redmond, there is only one state councillor position and one state opposition leader position. Moving to another position within the same organisation isn’t possible. In this case, she has chosen managing the circumstances as her way to fight for what she wants. Also, I have to wonder who Suzie thinks would be the subject of the complaint, and where it would even be lodged. You can’t just make some general, non-specific complaint about discrimination and expect some unnamed entity to investigate and act on it.

Womens Agenda

loading...

Smart Company

loading...

StartupSmart

loading...

Property Observer

loading...