How do you address gender inequality without resorting to stereotypes?
I've been spending most of the morning* doing research for my internship. I'm done with the mindless sorting through business school websites, and I'm doing real research - looking at what experts say about gender inequality in MBA programs, why it happens, and how to fix it. It's a fairly interesting topic on its own, but as I read through all the articles, something else keeps catching my eye: how come a lot of these experts and articles, all supposedly pro-women, rely strongly on stereotypes?
The article in this pdf, published by U.S. News & World Report April 10, 2006, is the best (worst?) example of this:
M.B.A. students also have the reputation of being “quant jocks” who excel at math-intensive subjects such as finance and accounting. This stereotype often keeps women, especially those uneasy over their quantitative abilities, from applying. In a 2000 study by research organization Catalyst and the University of Michigan Business School, 45 percent of women (and just 19 percent of men) said a lack of confidence in math abilities deterred them from pursuing an M.B.A.
Yet biology may be the biggest hurdle of all. Pursuing an M.B.A. often coincides with the period when marriage and children start to enter the picture for women. Unlike medical and law schools, to which applicants may apply straight out of college, B-schools typically require anywhere from three to five years of work experience before matriculation. “You’re looking at women who are between 25 and 28 and who are saying: ‘I know I would like to get married and have a family. Is this worth the investment?’” says Wendy Huber, associate admissions director at the University of Virginia’s Darden Graduate School of Business. (Male applicants, other admissions directors note, tend either to marry later or to receive more support from a spouse.)
To address these concerns, many schools are changing the way they pitch the M.B.A. to women. The University of Denver’s Daniels College of Business, for instance, is exploring female-friendly additions to its curriculum such as a math boot camp and negotiation course.
I mean, the facts are right, but it really bugs me how they're presented. Yes, women's quantitative abilities are (falsely) doubted in our culture, and many females are raised with the belief that they can't do math as well as males... but "female-friendly math boot camp"? Really? What about working to convince women they're good at math? What about men who failed their calc class?
Second is blaming the whole thing on "work/life balance," that is, the fact that women of a certain age start settling down and having babies. Okay, I realize that yes, women are still responsible for the bulk of child rearing in our society, and the burden to be "flexible" falls mostly on women - who are therefore impacted more by taking time off work or working part-time to care for children. However, unlike this pdf of a panel discussion at AU's Washington College of Law, which looks at the underlying societal assumptions that pressure both men and women to choose between family and work, most articles (and experts and studies) just go with the idea that women=babymakers, ignoring both the root of the problem (social assumptions) and also all the men out there that miss out on MBA school or high-powered business positions because they want to spend time raising a family.
Then there's this article from Business Week online (hosted by the Forte Foudnation), which suggests that the way to address the problem of not having enough females enrolled in an MBA program is:
Gradually increasing female enrollment is the top priority here. "When men start carrying 50% of the burden for family care, I think we'll see MBA classes made up of 50% women," says Edith A. Hunt, managing director at Goldman Sachs and chairperson of the executive board of the Forté Foundation.
First of all, it's got to be some sort of logical fallacy to say that "the way to solve the problem is to solve the problem!" Yes, increasing female enrollment would assist in increasing female enrollment! Second, I don't think it follows that more women MBA students would necessarily mean more men carrying family burdens... unless underlying social pressures about gender roles are addressed. Out of the context of this article, though, I agree with Hunt's quote.
I have found at least one article that addresses this assumption directly - this CBS Viewpoint piece by Georgie Binks:
I've had to listen to more than one man tell me why his particular profession just isn't for women. And I've listened to many women who leave their jobs because the battles are just too daunting.
...
[Gender specialist, Barbara Annis,] says the biggest myth is that women leave because of work/life issues. She explains, "Everybody is confronted with those issues, male or female. They leave because they don't feel their own authentic strengths are valued."
...
For example, one woman I spoke with who switched jobs within an industry says she did so because she did not feel the company valued her. After being one of the top performers at work, putting in long hours at night and on the weekend, she handed in her resignation only to be told by the boss that he had hoped once her kids were older she could have made a real contribution.
Now that makes the most sense to me - it's not just reality, but perception of reality, that's the real problem.** So while the articles and experts that talk about the importance of work/life balance to women (but not men) or women's lack of faith in their math skills (but not how this doesn't reflect their actual abilities) are trying to help, they're just furthering negative stereotypes.
And don't even get me started on the whole "the way to attract more women is to offer more touchy-feely classes!" idea.
*Madrid morning - i.e. noon to fiveish.
**One of the things that they talk about in this pdf (this is the panel discussion from WCL again) is how while most companies have part-time or flexible options available (for women and men), using them or even expressing interest in them puts an immediate ceiling on your career.
Now this is the kind of stuff I wanted to do with this internship!!
The article in this pdf, published by U.S. News & World Report April 10, 2006, is the best (worst?) example of this:
M.B.A. students also have the reputation of being “quant jocks” who excel at math-intensive subjects such as finance and accounting. This stereotype often keeps women, especially those uneasy over their quantitative abilities, from applying. In a 2000 study by research organization Catalyst and the University of Michigan Business School, 45 percent of women (and just 19 percent of men) said a lack of confidence in math abilities deterred them from pursuing an M.B.A.
Yet biology may be the biggest hurdle of all. Pursuing an M.B.A. often coincides with the period when marriage and children start to enter the picture for women. Unlike medical and law schools, to which applicants may apply straight out of college, B-schools typically require anywhere from three to five years of work experience before matriculation. “You’re looking at women who are between 25 and 28 and who are saying: ‘I know I would like to get married and have a family. Is this worth the investment?’” says Wendy Huber, associate admissions director at the University of Virginia’s Darden Graduate School of Business. (Male applicants, other admissions directors note, tend either to marry later or to receive more support from a spouse.)
To address these concerns, many schools are changing the way they pitch the M.B.A. to women. The University of Denver’s Daniels College of Business, for instance, is exploring female-friendly additions to its curriculum such as a math boot camp and negotiation course.
I mean, the facts are right, but it really bugs me how they're presented. Yes, women's quantitative abilities are (falsely) doubted in our culture, and many females are raised with the belief that they can't do math as well as males... but "female-friendly math boot camp"? Really? What about working to convince women they're good at math? What about men who failed their calc class?
Second is blaming the whole thing on "work/life balance," that is, the fact that women of a certain age start settling down and having babies. Okay, I realize that yes, women are still responsible for the bulk of child rearing in our society, and the burden to be "flexible" falls mostly on women - who are therefore impacted more by taking time off work or working part-time to care for children. However, unlike this pdf of a panel discussion at AU's Washington College of Law, which looks at the underlying societal assumptions that pressure both men and women to choose between family and work, most articles (and experts and studies) just go with the idea that women=babymakers, ignoring both the root of the problem (social assumptions) and also all the men out there that miss out on MBA school or high-powered business positions because they want to spend time raising a family.
Then there's this article from Business Week online (hosted by the Forte Foudnation), which suggests that the way to address the problem of not having enough females enrolled in an MBA program is:
Gradually increasing female enrollment is the top priority here. "When men start carrying 50% of the burden for family care, I think we'll see MBA classes made up of 50% women," says Edith A. Hunt, managing director at Goldman Sachs and chairperson of the executive board of the Forté Foundation.
First of all, it's got to be some sort of logical fallacy to say that "the way to solve the problem is to solve the problem!" Yes, increasing female enrollment would assist in increasing female enrollment! Second, I don't think it follows that more women MBA students would necessarily mean more men carrying family burdens... unless underlying social pressures about gender roles are addressed. Out of the context of this article, though, I agree with Hunt's quote.
I have found at least one article that addresses this assumption directly - this CBS Viewpoint piece by Georgie Binks:
I've had to listen to more than one man tell me why his particular profession just isn't for women. And I've listened to many women who leave their jobs because the battles are just too daunting.
...
[Gender specialist, Barbara Annis,] says the biggest myth is that women leave because of work/life issues. She explains, "Everybody is confronted with those issues, male or female. They leave because they don't feel their own authentic strengths are valued."
...
For example, one woman I spoke with who switched jobs within an industry says she did so because she did not feel the company valued her. After being one of the top performers at work, putting in long hours at night and on the weekend, she handed in her resignation only to be told by the boss that he had hoped once her kids were older she could have made a real contribution.
Now that makes the most sense to me - it's not just reality, but perception of reality, that's the real problem.** So while the articles and experts that talk about the importance of work/life balance to women (but not men) or women's lack of faith in their math skills (but not how this doesn't reflect their actual abilities) are trying to help, they're just furthering negative stereotypes.
And don't even get me started on the whole "the way to attract more women is to offer more touchy-feely classes!" idea.
*Madrid morning - i.e. noon to fiveish.
**One of the things that they talk about in this pdf (this is the panel discussion from WCL again) is how while most companies have part-time or flexible options available (for women and men), using them or even expressing interest in them puts an immediate ceiling on your career.
Now this is the kind of stuff I wanted to do with this internship!!