Why David Cameron Just Doesn’t Get It!
Oh dear! The leader of the Tory party in the UK and the current prime minister of Great Britain, wants to appoint a female special advisor to cast an eye over Government initiatives and to ensure policies are women friendly.
Yes, that’s right. The UK government feels the need to bring in a woman to check over policies so that they will win women’s votes in the next election. Whoops, sorry, I meant obviously he wants to make sure he is representing all the population. That’s at least 50% of us that need a special advisor.
I almost don’t know where to start, and I don’t even want to dignify such patronising nonsense with a considered response. But one piece of advice, David. This is 2011. Appoint some women into government.
And don’t ever tell me to “Calm Down Dear!”
The Best Way for Women to Advance their Careers!
This is the final post in a series of three about the latest Catalyst research The Myth of the Ideal Worker (see Does Doing All the Right Things Really Get Women Ahead? and What Every Woman Needs to Know About Work)
In brief, the research found that even when adopting the same strategies as men, the strategies generally viewed as effective, women do not advance at the same pace as their male counterparts. Of all the strategies used the most effective career strategy for women was making their achievements known to significant people, with networking also proving almost as effective for the women as the men.
Questions for Employers (and Women!) to Ask
Catalyst ask some searching questions at the conclusion of their report; they are good questions for women to ask of their employers, or potential employers too:
- What assumptions do organisations and individuals hold about skills and behaviours that are necessary for successful advancement?
- How are women and men being coached to get ahead? Are assumptions being made that what has worked for men will work for women (see Speak Up)
- What explains why women are less satisfied with their advancement and compensation progress when comparing themselves to others in their field and at their level? Do women know what male counterparts are earning?
- To what extent are people advanced and compensated based on skills and performance?
- How might strategies used by women and men be evaluated differently?
- How are individual contributions communicated and recognised for people who work in teams?
- If women realised that changing jobs negatively impacts on their pay, what does that mean for for organisations seeking to recruit experienced women, leveraging their skills and experience?
It’s a minefield out there at times and this research seems to bear out my own prejudice that male norms prevail in all areas. How can women get ahead if the received wisdom for getting ahead primarily suits men? I am reminded of the fact that for many years all information put out about to how to spot the symptoms of heart attacks were only the symptoms that applied to men. Women have different symptoms but it had been overlooked.
I am looking at issues such as these and at how you as an individual can minimise the impact, in my Speak Up course. It seems not only shouldn’t you have to behave like a man to get ahead, but even if you do, you’re disadvantaged!
More Women Please!
I’m listening to a debate on the radio (BBC Woman’s Hour) and one of our female MPs has just said we need both women and men in government and we need positive discrimination to achieve it.
The debate has gone on in the usual way with opponents saying positive discriminating for one sector means discriminating against another and it means they would just be token women in posts. The best person should get the job.
The Best Person for the Job is Male?
Of course, the best person should get the job. But my counter argument would be that women have not had a say in determining what is ‘the best person’ and by and large standards that are applied are those which suit males better than women. And until women are given an equal chance that will not change.
The evidence is that when BOTH women and men are involved on an equal footing the bottom line goes up (see Why Women Mean Business). It’s not about being anti men, or pro women. It’s about having a society which values all its members and values what they bring to the party! And because the rules were only set by one half of the population we haven’t yet achieved that. If the situations had been reversed and women ruled the world I’m sure we would have ended up with a similar issue.
And we’ve changed attitudes in the past by changing the rules. Let’s face it, if we hadn’t we still wouldn’t have universal suffrage and B&B establishments would still be allowed to have signs up saying ‘No Irish and No Blacks’, which they did in my lifetime.
Truly.
Also in my lifetime women could lose their jobs by marrying, didn’t get maternity leave, were marked differently at 11 plus because girls passed more often than boys so they had a higher pass mark to achieve, had to pay tax according to their husband’s income and couldn’t sign financial agreements on their own.
Legislation changed that.
By the way, I’m not 300 years old. I’m 55.
Photo Credit: Annika Banfield
Women and Networking
I’ve been to a networking event this morning, and on one level it was great. Well organised, good food (yucky coffee but you can’t have everything) yet it struck me that it was a very male way of doing business.
Now, if you’ve followed my posts for a while you’ll have gathered that I’m no shy and retiring flower. I’m pretty confident most of the time, a genuine extravert who loves meeting new people. I’ve run groups for young male offenders and worked within prisons and with groups of elected counsellors; I’m generally OK with groups of men and and I can take care of myself. Cripes, I’ve even been mugged and fought back (not recommended but I couldn’t help myself)
And yet as I walked into this networking event, alone, I had to do a sharp intake of breath. I was faced with a sea of men in suits all in animated discussion and it felt a tiny bit threatening. Eventually my eyes picked out that there were a few women there, maybe 10%? I girded my loins, walked up to a group and introduced myself.
And it was fine and they were a really nice group of blokes, but it was all so very male-oriented. The banter was quite competitive, there was some friendly joshing going on but it was very much on the level of stags showing off. And that’s OK; I grew up with two brothers, lots of male cousins and I can stand my ground. But actually, I don’t really like it and I don’t think I’m being totally true to myself. (Which may well have been true of some of the chaps but most looked very comfortable).
I contrast that with a women’s network I go to where the atmosphere is supportive and encouraging, where we feel able to talk about when things aren’t going so well, as well as when they are, and where the atmosphere is nowhere near as competitive.
There is nothing wrong with either approach. And I know that some men find this kind of event daunting and some women love them and thrive on it. But by and large these are not events where women feel at ease. And you can draw a parallel with many work places where one gender is not well represented. Once you get to a certain level the group that’s not represented is women…
Does anyone go to a networking arena which feels truly gender neutral? One which has been designed to make both men and women feel comfortable and able to give of their best? If so, please tell me about it and what makes it different.
Photo Credit: Svilen001
Something You Never Knew About Victorian Women!
You may well have heard that Victorian men thought that when women were anxious or irritable (hysterical paroxysm) the answer lay in their uterus; they had an interesting remedy! Their answer was to bring the women to orgasm and cure them.
I didn’t really believe this for years until I read Flow, by Stein & Kim and realised it was grounded in actual fact. Obviously women must have had something wrong with them if they behave ‘badly’! And the uterus had been viewed with suspicion through the centuries and seen as a source of all woes, even back to early history. Men sought to control women’s behaviour, which they viewed as over emotional, by attributing it to an organ in the body, one they (men) didn’t have.
And now more information has come to light. Apparently, the Victorians, whom we tend to view as staid and repressed, invented and freely sold electrical vibrators! And it seems the Victorians were far less embarrassed about advertising them than some of the coy adverts we see around today. And I thought all that swooning was about tight corsets!
If you want to read more, click here for the link to The Observer Newspaper article about the forthcoming film on this topic- Hysteria.
Why Do Female Doctors Earn Less?
Lying in bed reading the newspapers is my indulgent Sunday morning activity although often the stories make me splutter into my tea.
One such was this report on female doctors hitting a glass ceiling in the UK -this link will take you to the story.
Why?
Splutter over, I mused on what makes it so, particularly the comment that ‘women do not put themselves forward’. There are lots of obvious reasons like child care etc but actually, although most people now would not dispute that women are equally as capable as men, the world of working practices has not caught up.
Change The Way We Work
Work and working practices have been designed by men and suit men. Historically it’s how it happened. Women and ethnic minorities were not around when the basic principles were established. But if we were to design many of our old established professions to suit BOTH genders (not just make them female friendly which sounds somewhat patronising, but really think about a system that is open to everyone in our society), I believe the equality issue would fade. Modern companies that have taken this more inclusive route have found that both women AND men benefit.
What Do You Think?
Do you think your profession/job/career would be significantly different if both genders had devised the working remit? Please do share your thoughts with us.
