Posts
Recent research shows that there is gender bias in the playwriting arena. "There is discrimination against female playwrights in the theatre community," said Emily Glassberg Sands, who initiated this new research. Research also finds a shortage of good scripts written by women.
Sands, a Princeton economics student, conducted three separate studies on gender bias in theatre. The first examined the playwrights themselves. Results revealed that there were twice as many male playwrights as female playwrights, and that men produced more plays.
The second study looked at artistic directors and literary managers. Sand sent identical scripts to artistic directors and literary managers nationwide to determine if there was a difference in the number of ratings submitted with men's names vs. women. Yes, results of the study found that women's scripts received lower ratings.
The third study was Broadway. It was found that women write less than one in eight Broadway shows.
For more information to include more results of this study, please visit The New York Times and see the full article on "Rethinking Gender Bias in Theater" at http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/24/theater/24play.html?_r=1&adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1279973420-wZ9DIaN5kKF/nMqiFeXOpQ.
Saturday, July 24, 2010
July Is Women's Motorcycle Month
July is a time to celebrate Women's Motorcycle Month. This traditionally male-dominated passion, is being enjoyed by more women. According to recent statistics, "one of every 10 motorcycle owners is a women." The Ohio Department of Transportation reports that "the number of women motorcycle riders is increasing at a higher rate than the number of male riders - 28 percent versus 7 percent."
Today's women motorcycle riders are also more educated. Recent data shows that one-third of the current generation's women motorcycle riders have college degrees, and are more likely to hold a managerial or professional job than their male counterparts. Some famous women motorcycle riders are: Elizabeth Taylor, Courtney Cox, Angelina Jolie, KD Lang, Queen Latifa, Cher, and Lauren Hutton.
Today's women motorcycle riders are also more educated. Recent data shows that one-third of the current generation's women motorcycle riders have college degrees, and are more likely to hold a managerial or professional job than their male counterparts. Some famous women motorcycle riders are: Elizabeth Taylor, Courtney Cox, Angelina Jolie, KD Lang, Queen Latifa, Cher, and Lauren Hutton.
Wednesday, July 21, 2010
My Revolution From Within
I read famous women's activist, Gloria Steinem's book, Revolution From Within, as the supplement to my final paper. To say the least it was the perfect ending to my journey though this course. This book in many ways is a self-help guide to finding your inner-self -- a task that is not easy to do. I am sure that you have thought about who you are and what you stand for, but that as Gloria explains is just the beginning of self discovery.
I’m not talking about just our roles or social identities. We all identify ourselves as a friend, brother/sister, employee, boyfriend/girlfriend, husband/wife, partner, father/mother, son/daughter, all at the same time, but these are just an aspect of who we really are (these are often roles we play because we have been socialized to do so, but maybe they are not the true us). In essences, what I learned as I raced through the pages of her book, is that these identities don’t represent who we fundamentally are inside. Our inner-self is who we really are on the inside.
To know your inner self is to know your purpose, your values, your visions, your motivations, your goals and your beliefs without having society tell you what all of those things should be. Not as what you have been told by others, but what you have discovered for yourself. Knowing your inner self requires a high level of introspection and self-awareness, which Gloria humbly displays in this book -- this is her journey and a pathway for others to use as a guide on their own journey.
This knowing of self has a deep connection with feminism. It actually is one of the most fundamental parts of the feminist movement, which often is not discussed. Women must understand their strenghts/weakness in conjunction with understanding how society views these same characteristics , behaviors, etc... These may not directly conform with what YOU represent. What I think was the most profound thing I walked away with from this book is that I am the owner of my own life and I need to live my life for myself. A life that is defined by me, not what is defined by our society. This is going to take A LOT of work, but I am excited to make the journey just as Gloria Steinem unveiled in her book, Revolution From Within.
I’m not talking about just our roles or social identities. We all identify ourselves as a friend, brother/sister, employee, boyfriend/girlfriend, husband/wife, partner, father/mother, son/daughter, all at the same time, but these are just an aspect of who we really are (these are often roles we play because we have been socialized to do so, but maybe they are not the true us). In essences, what I learned as I raced through the pages of her book, is that these identities don’t represent who we fundamentally are inside. Our inner-self is who we really are on the inside.
To know your inner self is to know your purpose, your values, your visions, your motivations, your goals and your beliefs without having society tell you what all of those things should be. Not as what you have been told by others, but what you have discovered for yourself. Knowing your inner self requires a high level of introspection and self-awareness, which Gloria humbly displays in this book -- this is her journey and a pathway for others to use as a guide on their own journey.
This knowing of self has a deep connection with feminism. It actually is one of the most fundamental parts of the feminist movement, which often is not discussed. Women must understand their strenghts/weakness in conjunction with understanding how society views these same characteristics , behaviors, etc... These may not directly conform with what YOU represent. What I think was the most profound thing I walked away with from this book is that I am the owner of my own life and I need to live my life for myself. A life that is defined by me, not what is defined by our society. This is going to take A LOT of work, but I am excited to make the journey just as Gloria Steinem unveiled in her book, Revolution From Within.
Tuesday, July 20, 2010
Tokens
"That incident taught me that even if you are a token, you have an important function to fulfill. Many times since, when I have been the only African American or the only woman in a situation, I have spoken up for greater representation. But I have always first made a point of contributing my thinking to the work at hand. The value of a group is that each member brings the benefit of his or her life experience. If you hold back, not only is the group deprived, but you have lost an opportunity to contribute." - Dr. Dorothy Height
For my final paper, I read the book Open Wide The Freedom Gates by Dr. Dorothy Height. While I found the entire book insightful and encouraging this passage in particular stood out to me the most and I wanted to share it with everyone. I think this passage sums up what we have been talking about in class. Often in class we said that we did not necessarily feel comfortable standing up in particular situations because of our age or because of our position at work or we did not see the discrimination against women. However, in many ways I think we are all tokens. We may be the only woman or man, the only person of our particular race or sexuality, the only southerner, westerner, or northerner. And yet it is because of our "token" qualities that we have certain ideas, certain ideologies, or certain points of view. So, instead of hiding behind our "token qualities" as a reason for not speaking up we should embrace Dr. Height's suggestion and share our thoughts, experiences, and suggestions. I believe that it is only by sharing these parts of ourselves that we can truly begin to get to know one another and create the kind of change that we want to see.
For my final paper, I read the book Open Wide The Freedom Gates by Dr. Dorothy Height. While I found the entire book insightful and encouraging this passage in particular stood out to me the most and I wanted to share it with everyone. I think this passage sums up what we have been talking about in class. Often in class we said that we did not necessarily feel comfortable standing up in particular situations because of our age or because of our position at work or we did not see the discrimination against women. However, in many ways I think we are all tokens. We may be the only woman or man, the only person of our particular race or sexuality, the only southerner, westerner, or northerner. And yet it is because of our "token" qualities that we have certain ideas, certain ideologies, or certain points of view. So, instead of hiding behind our "token qualities" as a reason for not speaking up we should embrace Dr. Height's suggestion and share our thoughts, experiences, and suggestions. I believe that it is only by sharing these parts of ourselves that we can truly begin to get to know one another and create the kind of change that we want to see.
Wear a Pink Sari and Carry a Big Stick
The article "Wear a Pink Sari and Carry a Big Stick" posted on Slate.com is completely different from any topic we discussed in class. This article examines women's gangs that are rising in India to combat corruption in government and to defend women against injustices. The particular gang in the article was founded and is led by a 40-year-old woman named Sampat Pal Devi. According to the article, the gang started in 2006 as a way for women to look out for victims of domestic violence. When the gang would find out that a woman was a victim of domestic violence they would arrive at the house and demand that the husband stop the abuse. If the abuse continued, the gang of women would return to the house with bamboo sticks and "'persuade'" (as the article states) the husband to stop. Today, Sampat Pal Devi has a huge following of nearly 20,000 women and similar groups are cropping up around India. Some of these groups are even more violent and one group even killed a serial rapist and murderer after the courts failed to convict him.
Honestly, I was shocked to read this article. You do not often read about all-women gangs or groups of women resorting to violence. We talked a lot in class about how more women in leadership roles would create more positive change in the public and private sector. We talked about women being seen traditionally as collaborators and communicators. We did not talk about women who used weapons and fear to get their message across. In a heavily patriarchal society like India could women have brought about this sort of change without violence? Or do the men in power only respond to these women as a legitimate force because they can relate to the methods they are using? Is it taking women so long to rise to power in the United States because they are not using the methods traditionally used by men?
As a woman, I completely understand why these women are banning together and fighting corruption and injustice in India. However, I completely disagree with their methods. What is this teaching future generations? That force and fear is the only way to create change? Their continued methods of force and fear only seem to perpetuate the problem whereas by fighting this corruption and injustice in a peaceful manner could break the cycle.
Honestly, I was shocked to read this article. You do not often read about all-women gangs or groups of women resorting to violence. We talked a lot in class about how more women in leadership roles would create more positive change in the public and private sector. We talked about women being seen traditionally as collaborators and communicators. We did not talk about women who used weapons and fear to get their message across. In a heavily patriarchal society like India could women have brought about this sort of change without violence? Or do the men in power only respond to these women as a legitimate force because they can relate to the methods they are using? Is it taking women so long to rise to power in the United States because they are not using the methods traditionally used by men?
As a woman, I completely understand why these women are banning together and fighting corruption and injustice in India. However, I completely disagree with their methods. What is this teaching future generations? That force and fear is the only way to create change? Their continued methods of force and fear only seem to perpetuate the problem whereas by fighting this corruption and injustice in a peaceful manner could break the cycle.
Thursday, July 15, 2010
Are companies tipping the scale to choose men for their jobs?
When we were debating the Paternity Leave Law in Ecuador a fact came into the light. Private and public companies were tipping the scale to choose men for their jobs. Why?? Because having men in office was easier for companies. They didn’t have to pay them for maternity leave and breast-feeding. They did not have to worry if they get pregnant in any case.
Passing the law in Ecuador gave us a better family environment in any job, but also took a little bit of weight out of women’s scale.
When I read in Tarr - Whelan’s book about the “mommified”, that example came to my mind, but also, I shocked when I read this passage:
“Among peoples ages 27-33 that have never had children, women’s earnings approach 98% of men’s. Many women will hit the glass ceiling but many more will crash into the maternal wall. Ellen Goodman is right. Young women are closing the wage gap, but only until they have children”.
Is this true? If it is, can we change it?
My husband and I want to have children, but we want the family - work balance also. I think we will be able to do it, but this could happen only if we break the myths and change the bias. Can we do it? I think so. I found comforting ideas in this book that make me think that is not only a desire to do it. I think it is also our obligation to the new generation that is coming.
Will the Dodd-Frank Bill Change the Number of Women in the Boardroom?
While I haven't had a chance to read the full text of the Dodd-Frank Bill which is set to pass in the Senate later on this afternoon -- it sounds like it may contain some interesting and promising elements for the future of women and minorities around the Board room tables in America.
The bill calls for the creation of an Office of Minority and Women Inclusion -- below is the blurb in the House Summary of the Bill:
"NEW OFFICES OF MINORITY AND WOMEN INCLUSION
At federal banking and securities regulatory agencies, the bill establishes an Office of Minority and Women Inclusion that will, among other things, address employment and contracting diversity matters. The offices will coordinate technical assistance to minority-owned and women-owned businesses and seek diversity in the workforce of the regulators."
You can read more of the summary: http://financialservices.house.gov/Key_Issues/Financial_Regulatory_Reform/comprehensive_summary.pdf
While I don't see anything that specifically indicates that quotas will be implemented -- a few different news sources are saying that is the direction the bill is going in.
For example, the BBC posted an article about Women in the Board Room in the UK and a new report released about new statistics and it mentions that quotas are in the works here. You can read that article here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-10648355
I have to say, I was pretty skeptical that quotas would ever gain traction at any level of politics, governance or leadership in the U.S. when this class started -- but it seems as though it really may be happening.
What do you all think of this? Anyone heard any thing else about it?
The bill calls for the creation of an Office of Minority and Women Inclusion -- below is the blurb in the House Summary of the Bill:
"NEW OFFICES OF MINORITY AND WOMEN INCLUSION
At federal banking and securities regulatory agencies, the bill establishes an Office of Minority and Women Inclusion that will, among other things, address employment and contracting diversity matters. The offices will coordinate technical assistance to minority-owned and women-owned businesses and seek diversity in the workforce of the regulators."
You can read more of the summary: http://financialservices.house.gov/Key_Issues/Financial_Regulatory_Reform/comprehensive_summary.pdf
While I don't see anything that specifically indicates that quotas will be implemented -- a few different news sources are saying that is the direction the bill is going in.
For example, the BBC posted an article about Women in the Board Room in the UK and a new report released about new statistics and it mentions that quotas are in the works here. You can read that article here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-10648355
I have to say, I was pretty skeptical that quotas would ever gain traction at any level of politics, governance or leadership in the U.S. when this class started -- but it seems as though it really may be happening.
What do you all think of this? Anyone heard any thing else about it?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)