I dislike quotas. But not for the same reasons that many high-flying business-women and politicians dislike them, women who are as bright as they are ruthless, and who constantly like to remind us they can make it their own, thanks all the same.
The problem with quotas is that they allow us to make up the numbers without tackling the root causes of the inequality. It allows us to keep on with "business as usual" while comforting ourselves that, on paper, everyone is perfectly equal. But essentially, it's cheating.
If you want to see how it's done, or being done, we must of course point to the scandies, as sociologists so often have to do. Women did not get to the 3 most powerful political positions in Finland without a bit of childcare provision, it's safe to say. But it's not just about material provision, it goes far deeper than that.
Essentially it's about creating the social conditions which provide real equality of opportunity. For this, there are no shortcuts, and it is misleading to say otherwise. Women go to school, they get degrees. Isn't this enough? Apparently not, at least for the women who get written off before they've even had a chance to open their mouths or prove their merit in any way. Like the lines-person who was the unfortunate subject of the humorously-intended remarks of Gray & Keys, as was so eloquently pointed out by a young woman on Question Time when the matter was discussed. While Katie Hopkins pathetically defended them with the observation that "it's a tough world out there" - an argument which, if taken to its logical conclusion, would require the dismantling of all social provision, all rights for everyone, and indeed the dissolution of the entire fabric of society. Then finally we'd no doubt all be able appreciate just how tough a world it really is, and much good may it do us.
I never thought I'd put the words "good article Mariella Frostrup" in such close proximity, but hers was one of the best pieces I saw around International Women's Day. Her point about the lack of social acceptance of feminism is particularly insightful:
"75% of civilians killed in war are women and children, causing Major-General Patrick Cammaert, the former UN peacekeeping commander in the Democratic Republic of Congo, to declare in 2008: "It is now more dangerous to be a woman than a soldier in modern conflict."
These are staggering statistics, and yet not powerful enough to make arguing for women's rights a respectable pursuit, rather than the aggressive histrionics of popular perception. International Women's Day, the one day a year when we're encouraged to celebrate what we've achieved and highlight what still needs to be done, conjures less bile than the F word, but also more apathy.
But, Top Gear presenters aside, I wonder if members of either sex actually disagree with what feminism set out to achieve, which is the social, economic and political equality of the sexes (see any definition for confirmation of those goals). Better yet, it's a battle we've all but won."
I for one am so BORED of hearing about the "attack on the middle-class white male" and "political correctness gone mad", rattled off by people without even once having the presence of mind to think that perhaps they aren't best placed to know exactly what it's like for people who aren't in their position. Walk a mile and all that. The whole point about muslims/women/vaguely foreign looking people having to work twice as hard for the same money/recognition is that it is part of a process that is not obvious, that is by its very nature invisible.
Still, maybe there wouldn't be so much feminist-bashing if men didn't feel ever so slightly threatened. And yet all the statistics and numbers point to the fact that there is every reason for complacency among chauvinists and misogynists. The gaps are not closing. Women are still hardest hit by poverty, violence and economic hardship the world over. In Europe they are not payed as much, they are still victim to all manner of double standards about social behavior, and recent statistics showed that even in our "progressive western" societies, women still do the vast majority of the work in the household, including where children are concerned. Apparently all this is not reason enough to be reassured, because at the minutest sign of any preferential treatment being given to redress the balance even a touch - outpourings of indignation inevitably follow. And not just among men.
Oh boy, are women complicit. Women are the first to denounce in vitriolic terms feminism, quotas, positive discrimination or any kind of special treatment. Presumably some of them do it to gain credibility among their male competitors but I'm sure others are genuinely convinced. And there is not a lot that can be done about that, in the short term.
Women, as a whole, especially older women, are the most conservative, reactionary pro-status-quo demographic there is (and its a pretty sizable demographic). The pressures and messages about behavior that older generations of women project onto younger generations has a massive impact, not least in contributing to the internalising of the little voice inside women's heads that holds them back. It's profoundly cultural, and this is what makes it so complex.
And there's no getting away from the fact that we're all products of culture. Germaine Greer said that the problem is that "women like men but men don't really like women". I would have to say that I think it's women who have the problem with other women, essentially bound up with the problems they have with themselves (just look at my spiteful opening paragraph). And that applies to people whose sense of self-worth is undermined for any reason, whether it's to do with skin tone, sex, religion, ethnicity, whatever. We develop mechanisms to defend ourselves, often unconsciously. So in addition to being cultural, its also psychological. The only way these things change is through a deep, societal shift in attitudes, and inevitably it takes time.
But of course, I don't mean by this that it is an organic inevitable process that needs to be left to itself. The people and organisations who "manufacture" culture, in the arts and the media for example, have a crucial role to play. When Miriam O'Reilly successfully took the BBC to court for ageism, Nick Ross dismissed it by saying that TV has to be fashion-conscious (presumably he himself never went out of fashion in the whole 3 decades during which he was a presenter) - as if social trends were something divinely bestowed from the sky as opposed to very superficial and transient moods which images in the media play a key role to shape and perpetuate.
It's really heartening to see the men who do actually have the confidence to take feminism seriously rather than just seeing it as an attack on their entire gender. It's still almost shocking to hear a man declare he is a feminist. But things are not so good that we can afford to be glib and sarky about it all, on women's day of all days.
As for women, I personally am pessimistic about the prospects of a united global alliance of women, a world feminist movement if you will. How does one get that volume and sheer diversity of people under the same banner? And why should we have to. Isn't it enough to see women in the Tahrir squares of North Africa and the world to be inspired? Or Aung San Su Kii's quiet yet utterly fearless ongoing struggle. Rather than trying to speak on behalf of all women everywhere with a single political agenda, international women's day is as good a day as any to be quiet for a minute and reflect on the challenges people face everyday, whether its mothers in the European Parliament, black people in Poland or travellers in the British isles. To recognise their achievements, struggles and to think about how we can make the world a better one for them, and as a result, for everyone. Unfortunately, our staunch guardians against political correctness, the Rosses, Keyses and Grays of the world, despite being the ones who could benefit most from such empathy and momentary reflection, are the ones least likely to engage in it. it's too late for them, they won't change. We can only hope that they are a breed facing inexorable extinction.
No comments:
Post a Comment