You are here: Home / Careers / We can have it all. Can’t we?

We can have it all. Can’t we?

Posted by JaneHatton on January 29, 2010 · View Comments 

“Can women have it all?”

I find I get angry about discrimination around racism, homophobia, religion and disability, and for some reason less so about sexism. After all, things are so much better than they were, aren’t they? Women are able to work in all sorts of professions previously closed to them, and generally we’re earning more than we did. We can have it all. Can’t we?

WASHINGTON - MARCH 19: U.S. first lady Michel...
Image by Getty Images via Daylife

Well, no actually. More women may be in work these days, but we still earn less. On average, we earn 20.2% less across all employees (source: National Statistics Online). Exactly forty years after the Equal Pay Act 1970. Forty years of it being illegal to pay women less, and we still earn a fifth less!

More than half of first degrees are obtained by women. Girls consistently outperform boys at GCSE and A level. And yet only 10.5% of directors at FTSE-100 companies and 19.7% of MPs are women. Less than 20% of judges are women.

Women make up nearly half (46.7%) of the UK labour force, and yet still do over four times the amount of housework as men.

So, what do all these figures mean? Well, whilst more of us are working now, and generally earning more than we were, we still earn much less than our male counterparts. We are working more paid hours, but still doing the lion’s share of the domestic tasks. We achieve more academically, but are much less likely to work in positions of power or influence.

Why is this? Many, many factors I suggest, and only some of it to do with personal choice. It may be that some women choose not to work in high-pressured roles. But surely those that do choose those roles should earn the same as their male colleagues in the same role?

Some of it is around stereotypes. Women are discriminated against in the workplace for many reasons, and often around assumptions. Why would anyone employ a woman of child-bearing age? Why would a woman need to earn the same as a man when she probably has a husband who is earning? Women aren’t interested in power and influence, they prefer caring roles. Women don’t have the ambition and determination to succeed.

I will explore one of those assumptions – the reluctance to appoint young women because they might get pregnant, or they’ll have time off when their child is sick, or their childminder is sick, or their childminder’s child is sick – in my next blog.

These days, many women don’t have a husband at all, or they may have a husband who isn’t earning. Women have as diverse personalities and aspirations as men. Many women do have drive and ambition, and also other skills which are much-needed in a society with more service industries and fewer manufacturing industries.

In the same way, other stereotypes can be damaging for men. If a man wants to be a primary school teacher or a social worker, well, he just has to be a paedophile, doesn’t he? And of course there’s something quite wrong about a bloke wanting to be a midwife or a nurse or a hairdresser.

Wouldn’t it be lovely to live in a world where people are free to choose their career on preference rather than conditioning? And where each job pays what it is worth, irrespective of the gender of the post holder? And where people are appointed because of their skills, knowledge and suitability for a job rather than because of the stereotypes surrounding them? And where – heaven forbid – men could choose to stay at home and look after the children without an eyebrow being raised?

Do you think that will ever happen?

Jane

Enhanced by Zemanta
Related Posts with Thumbnails

Filed under Careers, Jane Hatton, Small Business, Woman in Business · Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , ,

  • A really thought provoking blog Jane.

    Here in the west we ahve made great in roads in as far as equality for women is concerned. On my travels in Africa I come across stories that leave me dumb founded! I came across a young woman who worked as an accountant for a small firm in Kampala Uganda. She went on maternity leave and when she failed to report for work 2 weeks after she had her baby her position was filled. Another woman I met her husband did not want her to have paid employment, so he locked her in their bedroom everyday whislt he went out to work. Fortuantely he forgot to lock the window so she would escape through the window to go to the office where she was employed as head of personnel. In the end he gave up!

    Will these attitudes ever change? I sincerely do no know
  • A relevant picture here, on the Sociological Images blog -

    http://contexts.org/socimages/2010/01/29/mother...
  • Jane
    Yes - interesting points. Good that they are a flexible employer, bad that they assume school hours would only appeal to women.
  • Back to the PC thing, I think we have to perhaps learn to realise that it's not just the words that matter - it's really about discerning the intention.

    Not easy, I know, but still fundamental.
  • Ian
    Nice blog Jayne. I think you are trying to address two things here:

    1. Stereo types, and hence ....
    2. The restrictions they place on achievement

    I see less of it today, but many women in the recent past who wanted to be "successful" seemed to have literally put on the trousers, and mentally grown something between their legs - it certainly was delivered with that mentality and attitude. I conclude part of the thankful drift away from that is the ability to start one's own business, which many bright women who want a career and a family realise is a more fulfilling way of getting it all over continually fighting glass ceilings.

    Are we ever going to remove stereotypes? I doubt it. Victorian civility is 200 years old, while the human race goes back 100million+. Psychologists tell us that we assess people in less than 30seconds, and it takes one almighty shock to get anyone to substantially change thier view of you post the first to third meetings.

    Accepting that, the answer personally is education. Its an ancient fight or fright fear complex that creates these stereotypes, so balancing the subconscious fear with the rational good experience through school and college may give opportunity the ability to come through and triumph.

    Education also has other benefits. Where in the third world women have equal access to education, they have children later, and birth rates go down - its actually cheaper then handing out contraception! Further, GDP tends to increase as the number of educated women increases, due to the economies move away from a reliance on self-sufficient agriculture to more professional trades, notably the law.

    You may be able to relate to this, but I am actually less concerned these days by women's opportunity than the clear lack for the disabled. I was shocked to find that two thirds of blind people are technically unemployed, and hence 40% are depressed. Having learnt this late last year, I made time for an open-house at the Cardiff RNIB, and was amazed at the level of technology available to address various issues to gain employment. When I chatted to one of the staff, she commented: we feel left behind, we are the last of the disconnected and stereotyped communities.

    Trying to fight stereotypes and hence the cap on opportunity through further legislation I conclude is pointless exercise. I would much prefer to see education and local enterprise initiatives to break down barriers to create a more equal society, than anything else.
  • Jane
    Hi Ian - yes, excellent points. It is very much about stereotypes, and of course it will take a long time to challenge or change those. I'll be looking in future blogs about how that might be addressed, but I think it's a combination of education, training, media (that's a huge one), religion and culture generally. Legislation does have a role to play, and is sadly necessary, but not very effective (as we can see from the Equal Pay Act).

    Disability is a huge issue in terms of the attitudes of employers, and one I'm very conscious of, but I wanted these blogs to look at a range of aspects of diversity.
  • I'm not sure anybody can ever have it all...we all have a limited amount of time and energy and have to choose how we spend it.

    I do think it's sad that choices are still judged based on gender. When they had children, my brother and his wife made an agreement that he would take primary responsibility for them - they both work but she is older and wanted to concentrate on her career, while he wanted to have children while he was still young.

    It works very well for them, except that my sister in law comes in for a lot of criticism, as if she is somehow breaking the rules. I think the family thought she would change her mind and "get her priorities right" when the children arrived. I personally think she is doing a great job, and that her daughter will grow up able to decide for herself
  • Jane
    Yes, it should about choice, and "the right priorities" will be different for each individual and each family.

    In a family where the man takes responsibility for the majority of the child care (or who has custody in a separation), the man will face criticism for not being a proper man and being the financial provider, and the woman will be criticised for not being a proper mother.
  • Linda Mattacks
    "Wouldn’t it be lovely to live in a world where people are free to choose their career on preference rather than conditioning?"

    I know this is primarily from the female point of view but thought I'd just share this anyway.

    I asked my hairdresser a while ago how he got into that line of work (now don't judge & blame his skills from my photo - I only see him about 3 times a year ;-)).

    He said he was pretty useless at school because he wasn't really interested in anything. Consequently he left with no 'O' levels of any use yet his dad said he had to have a 'proper' trade.

    So, knowing a couple of flash geezers who were hairdressers that always seemed to have enough money to dress well, enjoy themselves and girls hanging on their arms... He thought he's give it a go.

    He turned out to have a talent for it and, as the saying goes, the rest is history. He doesn't want to work for anyone else, nor does he want the aggro of running his own salon so his entire clientele comes from word of mouth and recommendation.

    I don't think I've ever seen him stressed out: He works the hours that provide enough for his needs and allow him to put some money by. He seems to have it sussed!
  • Jane
    Fantastic example Linda. Surely we should be able to choose vocations based on aspiration and skill, not on gender stereotypes. It's often assumed, for example, that a male hairdresser must be gay. Some are, of course (as in any trade) but it's not a compulsory requirement!
  • Editor
    I get really annoyed Jane when working on my own career (and doing better than the husband at the time) it was still me who had to take the afternoon off when Jess had conjunctivitis as a young child.

    Even though the nursery knew Hubby was closer, knew that Jess would be happy with either one of us, they still called me out to get her.

    I think it must be harder for those that work in small and micro companies, and it is so much tougher now that families live further apart. The way things are grandparents are often not close by to help out like they used to be.

    It will be a few more years before we can have it all...
  • Jane
    Yes, absolutely. The assumption is that it is always the mother who is responsible for parenting. This is not only discriminatory for women (inasmuch as they may not be employed or promoted because the employer will assume they will want time off) but also for men. The men who do happily assume childcare responsibility for their children are often sidelined or even ignored by teachers, doctors, social workers etc.
blog comments powered by Disqus