Menu
Ireland's political and cultural magazine
April 2016 5 1
T
here are well-meaning campaigns to increase
the number of female voices in Irish media
and politics.
Equal treatment of the sexes is a war that
needed to be fought. It doesn’t just benefit
women, it benefits men as well, as men can be freed
from a race to the bottom of macho culture that tends
to invade work and social relations.
It benefits us all when in politics women bring differ-
ent views to a discussion. There is plenty of research
that shows a plurality of views leads to better decision-
making. We also know that women make decisions in
different ways. Women tend to be more cautious, which
means they avoid making massive (and grave) errors.
Think bankers and their under-regulation.
The cause of feminism is not over, but the war has in
effect been won - no one would seriously argue against
the principle. There are, however, some important skir-
mishes left to be finished in the clean-up operation.
‘Skirmishes’ is probably too soft a word for issues
such as the pay gap and the glass ceiling. But the causes
of these things are quite complex and certain measures
to advance women’s rights might be unfair, ineffective
or unnecessary. But who studies them? It’s usually just
those people who feel most oppressed. It’s what the
Canadian philosopher Joseph Heath calls ‘me’ studies.
Because gender studies is dominated by a certain
type of person it is (ironically) falling into the trap that
the absence of women in decision-making positions in
politics, science, business, academia and elsewhere
suffer: they do not hear reasonable criticisms.
That’s because now to criticise any form of feminism
or a measure for gender equality is to expose yourself
as against equality. Those who are in fact in favour of
equality, but don’t want to appear to be opposed then
stay silent from these debates. Only a small extreme
minority vocalises against it, and this further convinces
the ‘me studies’ crew of the moral rectitude of their
position.
Stopping the conversation has a number of negative
consequences, led by the danger we lose sight of the
real causes and complexity of the issues.
Simpson’s Paradox is a quirk in probability that
shows that trends in statistics disappear or are reversed
when the data are combined. A famous case is admis-
sions to Graduate School in Berkeley in 1973. The data
showed a large and statistically significant bias in
admissions in favour of men.
No. of
applicants
No. of
applicants
men 8,442 44%
women 4,321 35%
A naive analysis of the data suggested Berkeley had a
case to answer. But statisticians there observed when
the data are broken down by department the trend is
reversed. There’s a bias in favour of women!
Depart-
ment
MEN WOMEN
Applicants Admitted Applicants Admitted
A 825 62% 108 82%
B 560 63% 25 68%
C 325 37% 593 34%
D 417 33% 375 35%
E 191 28% 393 24%
F 373 6% 341 7%
That’s because women are systematically more likely to
apply to courses that have much lower admissions rates.
Other cases are more complex. When we discuss the
glass ceiling, factors that are less easy to measure or
observe might explain discrepancies.
Gender is pretty easy to measure – the vast majority
of people can be put in the binary categories of male or
female. We often focus on it to the exclusion of other
sources of discrimination. But there are many other
important sources of difference among humans. Gender
equality isn’t the threat that class inequality poses.
Feminism has largely won because middle-class
women and middle-class men share interests.
Why would middle-class men feel threatened by
allowing their wives, sisters or neighbours to achieve
equality? It won’t cost us anything.
Middle-class Dublin voices are broadly the same
regardless of gender. And the establishment will be
happy to fixate on any remaining inequalities, because
feminism deflects attention from the more threatening
issue of class inequality.
The next time you are invited to join criticism of a
panel or committee deemed a ‘sausage fest’, also ask
about class, age, race and nationality. In a gender-
neutral panel or a gender-neutral cultural programme
there are likely to be other important voices not being
heard.
Class not gender
is intractable
Feminism is unassailable but fixating on it
deflects from class-based inequalities
The next time you
hear a panel or
committee being
criticised as a
‘sausage fest’,
also ask about
class, age, race
and nationality
OPINION
Eoin O'Malley
ALTERNATIVE
AN
VIEW
Feminism doesn't always embrace class equality
