Feminism and the silencing of women

[friendofdorothy]

This thread has been good for the broader conversation. On this page alone we have age/power dynamics, manels, modern writing that continues to be 'lost' to readers in the Internet era, the usual medical misdiagnosis. Your post #592 is a very interesting addition. Also Fozzie Bear's #552

What we are doing is telling stories of commonplace, largely unreported silencing. That is less dramatic and less interesting to many, especially if they are unfamiliar with being a woman.

eta I just saw you did some thread housekeeping friendofdorothy lol

Thanks mango5 what is manels?

 

[bluescreen]

Thanks mango5 what is manels?

Panels consisting entirely of men?

 

[mango5]

Manels are silencing incarnate

UNSDG | No more manels: A new pledge by UN Indonesia takes aim at all-male panel discussions

You’ve seen it before. Probably many times. Panel discussions featuring men only. Maybe they’re talking about economics or policy or community engagement or health. The panelists may be experts in their fields, but the panels are missing something. Women.

unsdg.un.org

Time to End the Manel Tradition

NIH director will no longer participate in all-male panels.

www.nih.gov

End Manels: How More Female Experts Can Speak at Policy Conferences

An End to Manels II examines data from 23 conferences in Europe, over the course of five years.

www.opensocietyfoundations.org

 

[bluescreen]

Among the more notable was the 2012 conference on Women in Society, attended by representatives of 15 countries, held at the University of Qassim.





see also All-Male Nonsense by Kecia Ali

 

[kabbes]

It both constitutes and is constituted of gender power dynamics. Both cause and effect, in perpetual loop

For example, I held a focus group recently. It didn’t need to be statistically representative or anything — I just needed some people of the professional-managerial class. I asked 10 people — 7 men, 3 women. But lo and behold, none of the women were available for any of the proposed dates. They were all overcommitted — jobs, children, elderly parents etc. So I ended up with a group of six men. Somehow, they were the ones with free time.

 

[Sue]

It both constitutes and is constituted of gender power dynamics. Both cause and effect, in perpetual loop

For example, I held a focus group recently. It didn’t need to be statistically representative or anything — I just needed some people of the professional-managerial class. I asked 10 people — 7 men, 3 women. But lo and behold, none of the women were available for any of the proposed dates. They were all overcommitted — jobs, children, elderly parents etc. So I ended up with a group of six men. Somehow, they were the ones with free time.

Genuine question. Why did you only ask three women in the first place? Were there only three women who met your criteria? If so, why? Did you reassess your criteria when none of them could do it?

Or look at other ways of potentially making it more accessible to them/other women?

 

[Magnus McGinty]

Yes there is a feminism and violence against women thread

I did search but couldn't find it for some reason. Probably chose incorrect search terms.

 

[kabbes]

Genuine question. Why did you only ask three women in the first place? Were there only three women who met your criteria? If so, why? Did you reassess your criteria when none of them could do it?

Or look at other ways of potentially making it more accessible to them/other women?

Qualitative research does not attempt to be generalisable to the wider population. You’re analysing some kind of process within a particular context to gain insight into the process itself. You’re not claiming to have discovered some underlying law that applies universally. The research is into how those who are a position to institutionalise their morality construct right and wrong with faced with ideological dilemmas within workplace contexts. That means i need a group of people who have that kind of power. That presents considerable practical difficulties in recruitment — you work with what you’ve got.

 

[muscovyduck]

I can't remember if it was on here or somewhere else, someone was talking about how they had to set a quota to make sure they got an equal representation of women for their job applications and they kept having to bounce the job back at the recruiters because they recruiters would send qualified men and unqualified woman despite loads of qualified women being out there

 

[Sue]

That means i need a group of people who have that kind of power. That presents considerable practical difficulties in recruitment — you work with what you’ve got.

I see. Your 'just' makes it sound like it shouldn't have been very hard:

I just needed some people of the professional-managerial class the professional-managerial class.

So there were only three women you could ask, yes?

 

[Red Cat]

I see. Your 'just' makes it sound like it shouldn't have been very hard:

So there were only three women you could ask, yes?

In that sentence, trust is in opposition to statistically relevant, the just is in the context of a piece of research.

eta looks like I made a freudian slip, trust was supposed to say just

 

[SpookyFrank]

Among the more notable was the 2012 conference on Women in Society, attended by representatives of 15 countries, held at the University of Qassim.

View attachment 407270



see also All-Male Nonsense by Kecia Ali

Looks like a Monty Python sketch that was rejected for being too daft.

 

[kabbes]

So there were only three women you could ask, yes?

Is it surprising that out of 10 people you manage to identify in positions of material power over others, only three of those would be women?

 

[Sue]

Is it surprising that out of 10 people you manage to identify in positions of material power over others, only three of those would be women?

Your original point was that the women you asked were too busy to get involved. I asked:

Why did you only ask three women in the first place? Were there only three women who met your criteria?

And it seems, yes, this was the case.

Going by my own industry though, women at a highish level are asked to participate in all kinds of extra stuff (women in industry groups, representing their companies at events so they look less male dominated, that kind of thing.)

And then they're likely to be the 'go to' women for things like your focus group because they're the women you're aware of at that level. And that's before potential caring responsibilities etc.

(Of course, could be they're just not interested in your thing and saying they're too busy is an easy get out. )

Is it surprising that out of 10 people you manage to identify in positions of material power over others, only three of those would be women?

The bit in bold is interesting though as it implies there may be other women in your company/group who meet your criteria but you're just not sure who they are. Maybe others haven't identified them yet either so they might have more time for your stuff?

 

[kabbes]

To be honest, I think we're kind of making the same point, which is the one I started with -- the lack of female representation on panels both constitutes and is constitutive of society. It's both cause and effect of the gendered power dynamics.

As to my particular research study, which is nothing whatsoever to do with my work -- for this pilot study, I was trying to form a focus group of 6-8 people who would all be both willing and available to meet at the same time in the same place for two hours in their own time, within a two week window over the Christmas period. On top of that already challenging task, these individuals also had to be in positions whereby they were able to institutionalise their own moral constructions as the rules of the game for others. I challenge you to actually identify enough people that you can ask to make that happen, let alone get picky about it on top of the criteria you're already working to!

 

[mango5]

I could give one of my extemporary monologues on the theme of ethics-based challenges to social research methodologies, academic peeragogy and empirical pragmatism but that's reserved for my paying audience.

What were we saying about feminism and the silencing of women?
Manels are a somewhat trite sub-topic, albeit a handy concept and illustration.

 

[Larry O'Hara]

I could give one of my extemporary monologues on the theme of ethics-based challenges to social research methodologies, academic peeragogy and empirical pragmatism but that's reserved for my paying audience.

What were we saying about feminism and the silencing of women?
Manels are a somewhat trite sub-topic, albeit a handy concept and illustration.

Paying audience? Do they pay to listen, or not listen?

 

[mango5]

Both exist in the room, I imagine. The ones not listening are not always obvious.

I arrange manels intentionally every few months, when I can identify participants who are far from pale, male, stale contributors on the topic at hand. It can be a good framing to encourage my colleagues' critical engagement with the panellists work. I know this because colleagues say they have more confidence to assert themselves in these conversations.

I'm always experimenting with ways to shift workplace etiquette that helps people to think about what influences their thinking.

How have your thoughts developed while reading this thread Larry O'Hara?

 

[friendofdorothy]

I'm always experimenting with ways to shift workplace etiquette that helps people to think about what influences their thinking

I'm so glad I don't have to worry about work politics anymore.

I am dealing with councils and charities and other orgs in the self motivated projects I do. I'm find being on outside is useful when challenging the status quo.

Look forward to learning more about you shifting that etiquette and the reaction of your colleagues.

I refuse to sit on panels that are all white or all cis male apart from me.

 

[Larry O'Hara]

Both exist in the room, I imagine. The ones not listening are not always obvious.

I arrange manels intentionally every few months, when I can identify participants who are far from pale, male, stale contributors on the topic at hand. It can be a good framing to encourage my colleagues' critical engagement with the panellists work. I know this because colleagues say they have more confidence to assert themselves in these conversations.

I'm always experimenting with ways to shift workplace etiquette that helps people to think about what influences their thinking.

How have your thoughts developed while reading this thread Larry O'Hara?

Restrained mirth: if you are for real very glad I am not in that world…
To answer your question specifically
1. Incredulity
2. Sadness
3. Mirth
4. Relief

 

[friendofdorothy]

To answer your question specifically
1. Incredulity
2. Sadness
3. Mirth
4. Relief

So this is your reaction to reading this thread? I don't understand the mirth or relief. Are you laughing at us?

 

[friendofdorothy]

Among the more notable was the 2012 conference on Women in Society, attended by representatives of 15 countries, held at the University of Qassim.

View attachment 407270



see also All-Male Nonsense by Kecia A

FFS! Not surprising in Saudia arabia. More surprising when it happens here.

 

[Larry O'Hara]

So this is your reaction to reading this thread? I don't understand the mirth or relief. Are you laughing at us?

Only one of four reactions but frankly I find this whole corporate/managerial stuff really alien to me.
The relief is I have nothing to do with it…

 

[muscovyduck]

Only one of four reactions but frankly I find this whole corporate/managerial stuff really alien to me.
The relief is I have nothing to do with it…

Great. You understand a lot of non-corperate jobs like the trades, construction and so on are all but closed off to women?

 

[bluescreen]

Edit: [On second thoughts, deleted.]

 

[Larry O'Hara]

Great. You understand a lot of non-corperate jobs like the trades, construction and so on are all but closed off to women?

 

[Larry O'Hara]

Of course I do: an asinine comment.

Think I’ll leave you all to your corporate musings on this thread, apologies for a mere prole like myself entering your boardroom

 

[Sue]

Of course I do: an asinine comment.

Think I’ll leave you all to your corporate musings on this thread, apologies for a mere prole like myself entering your boardroom

If you've read the whole thread, you'll know little (none?) of this is about boardrooms.

And much of the stuff about work meetings, for example, would equally apply to political meetings or community meetings or pretty much any other environment where you interact with people.

I think you could learn a lot from sticking around and listening to what people are saying.

 

[Larry O'Hara]

If you've read the whole thread, you'll know little (none?) of this is about boardrooms.

And much of the stuff about work meetings, for example, would equally apply to political meetings or community meetings or pretty much any other environment where you interact with people.

I think you could learn a lot from sticking around and listening to what people are saying.

I started work and political involvement at 16 and have learnt a lot in 50 years, which includes how to detect when I am being condescended to. So I will now ignore this thread, hope you all enjoy yourselves

 

[Santino]

I started work and political involvement at 16 and have learnt a lot in 50 years, which includes how to detect when I am being condescended to. So I will now ignore this thread, hope you all enjoy yourselves

Condescending means talking down to someone.