By Imogen Randell.
It’s time we all started talking again. The kind of debates that are lively, sometimes heated, oftentimes entertaining. Lively critical conversation is always a sign of a tolerant democratic society that values different ideas and thrashes around topics with a carefree attitude to unlock our opinions and firm up our positions. These debates seem to have become more muted in the public arena as fear of difference, of being cancelled or simply offending someone has stymied our conversations and sharing of our real opinions with a diverse audience.
Discussions are being had. But they tend to be with smaller, like-minded tribes. I’m as guilty as the next person. The conversations I’ve been having about gender equality are all among women – my friends, my work peers, my daughters. Not with men. Not as a lively dinner time debate. More a careful conversation of shared disbelief. The underlying thread centres on how systemised and institutionalised the ongoing marginalisation of women is and a shared bewilderment that progress is so slow. Whether it’s medical testing historically being conducted on male rats only (as female rats and their hormones present too many variables); crash test dummies for cars tested only on male mannequins; or simply the temperature of the office being set for optimal performance for men (and therefore too cold for women). These are simple things and yet the systemised design has overlooked half the population.
If genuine progress on diversity and inclusion is to be achieved in relation to gender equality, particularly in the workplace, then more meaningful, open, constructive conversations that include more diverse points of view in the public arena need to be occurring. Discussion and questions need to be raised about how we navigate change where men can contribute to meaningful conversation and be a part of the change needed.
We can change the rules and we have; however as an experienced behavioural researcher, social norms are challenging to evolve. In our June AustraliaNOW sentiment survey, people were asked to choose the top five traits that we admire in women and in men. The results were clear that we admire women who are (number one) compassionate, followed by kind, nurturing, empathetic and confident. Meanwhile among men we admire those who are (number one) protective (no irony), strong, confident, brave and independent. This is not made up.
The rules have changed: for example, men can now access paid parental leave. According to reporting by the Australian Government’s Workplace Gender Equality Agency (WGEA), women account for 88% of all paternity leave utilised and men just 12%[i]. Is it because of these underlying expectations that we have that men still go out and protect and provide, be strong while women care and nurture our children?
Same can be said for what we seek from our leaders. Women technically can rise through the ranks and lead large listed organisations, typically with a different style of leadership and probably because they blend both feminine and masculine character traits to do so. And more of them do today than ever before, but still not to the same extent as men do. And let’s face it, there’s still a pay gap typically when they do.
There’s even a Federal Government department called the Office for Women dedicated to achieving gender equality. Yet, the rate of murder at the hands of an intimate partner is higher than ever[ii]. When asked if society is failing women, 45% said yes it is. Understandably, this was much higher among women (57%) than men (31%). In contrast, when the same question was asked about whether society is failing men, only 29% of Australians agreed. And not surprisingly, 37% men and 21% women. The men more likely to agree with this were those aged under 35 years (39%) or in the middle-aged years of 35 to 59 years (42%).
It gets even more interesting when the reasons given as to why society is failing women were examined. Most are based on equal opportunities, safety, respect, wage gaps, domestic violence, work and home duties, sexism and sexualisation. Easy ones to guess. The reasons given for why society is failing men were: mental health, bias and blame, masculinity (as a construct), suicide, custody rights, abuse, gender quotas and criticism. Men felt blamed, isolated, without adequate support and not taken seriously. Clearly there is a disconnect in the issues from a gendered perspective.
This is alarming given what has been observed in the USA. Mass shootings are uniquely male crimes and in a majority of cases, involve young, white men. Thankfully the gun amnesty enacted in Australia after the mass shooting at Port Arthur means it is much more difficult for men in Australia to access a gun, let alone high powered guns of mass destruction. What we are seeing however, is the increased prevalence of knife crime in the community more broadly among young men and then specifically the horrendous event at Bondi Junction where a white male perpetrator appeared to target women in a murderous act.
If we are to make progress to a fairer, more inclusive, supportive culture where women do not experience violence, feel safe, and experience equality, we need to have meaningful dialogue about gender and create change. This is not easy when women are being murdered at the hands of men and when high levels of younger men feel that society is failing them, they feel blamed and don’t feel heard. We can continue talking amongst those who share our views but collectively this will likely only serve to reinforce our positions, pull us further apart. Meaningful conversation will take commitment from both men and women to rise above blame and to listen in a compassionate and empathetic way. To be heard and validated was always part of a healthy debate. We need it now more than ever.
