In two weeks, we vote as a country to remove gender-stereotyped language from our constitution. A language which states that by her life within the home, [a] woman gives to the State a support without which the common good cannot be achieved and that the State shall, therefore, endeavour to ensure that mothers shall not be obliged by economic necessity to engage in labour to the neglect of their duties in the home.
Words and messages in all formats matter. They permeate our societal consciousness in ways we can’t even see.
A recent UK study of professional services showed that 41% of women work part-time compared to 13% of men. A 2014 study of Sanford MBA graduates showed that 50% of male graduates expected more significant and financially rewarding careers than their partners, and 75% expected their spouses to take full childcare responsibilities. These men are a decade into their march towards the C-Suite, lovely. Presumably, their well-educated wives are wiping bums and making New York Times tray bakes to facilitate this progress.
This insidious conservatism flies in the face of our expectations around the following generations. I often say that my kids’ generation is hard-wired for equity. Our job is to reform the systems in our workplaces to be fit for purpose. It appears that it’s not universal. A recent Gallup poll showed that in the US, women aged 18 to 30 are now 30 percentage points more liberal than their male contemporaries. That gap took just six years to open up.
That’s why removing the ‘woman’s duty to the state’ from the constitution and our mindsets is essential.
It is also why we must all be mindful of perpetuating gendered stereotypes, making gendered assumptions and seeing this as a woman’s issue. It’s not. This is about our collective responsibility to build a tolerant and inclusive society. This stuff isn’t easy. I catch myself screwing up all the time. At a restaurant recently, I asked the waiter to thank the chef for his delicious food. My adult children pulled me up ‘Sexist!’ they guffawed, only too delighted to catch me in the act. They were right. It wasn’t through malice, just deep hard-wiring. I do try to use non-gender pronouns as much as possible; it doesn’t cost me much more than a little mental energy, and it is a constant internal checker not to make gender assumptions.
These considerations around gender are just the beginning. The idea is that we move to a society where people can be engaged with and valued regardless of identity and visible and invisible differences.
Now more than ever, we need male allies.
We need to have conversations with the good guys. We must give them the confidence and the tools to break the cycle and redesign the systems to support everybody’s needs.
Everybody’s afraid of having vulnerable conversations, asking about people’s challenges, and getting to know their perspective a little more. There is so much to be learned in that level of engagement. It allows us all to see that our worldview is not singular.
I do a simple exercise with male leaders. I ask them to go and have five cups of coffee with people different to them, any access, gender, race, religion, sexuality, class, ability, take your pick. You buy and ask to ask one question. ‘Is it ok if I ask you about any challenges you’ve faced in your career because of your identity? The asking to ask is a pro tip from Allyship expert Prof David Smith. It creates a little insurance policy.
One senior male leader returned to say he’d had sixteen cups of coffee, presumably not all on the same day. He was so surprised by people’s willingness to share, their gratitude for his interest and their appreciation of his listening. This information can help us create the appropriate systems so everybody can thrive.
Have you heard of the ‘curb-cut effect’, dear friend? In the 1970s, disability activist Michael Pachovas and some friends poured cement off a sidewalk in Berkeley to create a makeshift ramp. Until then, they had been navigating an obstacle course in Berkley and every other urban area. That act of vandalism created a pathway to mobility globally and for billions. The addition of accessibility measures for wheelchair users made life easier for people (not mothers) with pushchairs, wheelbarrows, trolleys, suitcases, etc. The curb-cut effect states that in removing barriers for some, you automatically and inadvertently remove barriers for many. Those barriers come in many forms.
We can only start to address and reform them when we know about them.
