Interesting Reactions to International Women Day

We celebrated International Women’s Day last Friday, and I spoke with a class about the issue of advocacy and social justice in this context.  After a few moments of private talk between student pairs, I opened up the discussion to the whole class.

Or rather, I tried to open it up; as the tumbleweed blew through the class, and the students suddenly found their shoes to be objects of intense fascination, I was given an extended opportunity to practice what we teachers call ‘wait time’.  It was tempting for me to fill the uncomfortable silence, but I resisted, and after a while there was one timidly offered comment which said a great deal: “Even though this is the sort of issue we are aware of, and usually very open to, it is very hard to discuss this between students”.  It turns out, from this and other conversations, that there are substantial numbers of students, boys and girls, who have reservations about advocating for gender equality in this way.

In a school where the Mission is social justice, this seems shocking.  Strangely, it’s not that people are against equality; the same people actively advocate for many other causes in many ways.  So why is this a contentious issue?

A small number don’t believe there is an issue in their lives.  They see apparent equality between girls and boys in Singapore, and are content to rest with that.  The basis of thinking here is questionable (Singapore certainly doesn’t see it this way – see here) and so some conversations there are certainly possible. But even if the facts are established, not every issue will resonate with every student, and we have to accept that.

Other students feel that celebrating women is intrinsically against equality.  I have heard the retort what about international men’s day?  Why can’t we celebrate that? ** This seems to me to be a mistaken argument.  There is, in fact, an international men’s day (November 19th) and we are delighted to celebrate it; but it turns out that the people who make the retort are not really advocating for that celebration either.  It seems to me that this isn't the real reason; that it is, in fact, the notion of celebrating one gender that seems somehow unfair. In this case, to some extent we have to say fair enough – as I said above, not everyone can support every good cause.  But that cannot be the whole story either. Why do those who want to focus elsewhere not just go ahead and do that? Why do they speak against supporting women? The analogy with other areas makes this very clear; I may prefer running to football, but I would never want to stop anyone playing kicking a ball about.  I may prefer science fiction over biography, but I’m hardly going to ask the library to stop stocking the latter.

Listening on IWD 2020.  Many males are very supportive. 
But not all... why not?
Photo: Jamie Dimalanta

So what’s going on?  It’s important to understand because – let me re-iterate – the group I am talking about here consists of caring people who give up their time for other good causes, and who are seeking to make the world better place in other ways.   And they would not dream of using this argument elsewhere, say, for example, speaking against collections for cancer patients on the grounds that there are also people suffering from depression.

I believe that the issue here is to do with self-perception and identity.  The nay-sayers here would never dream of joining a sexist club. And perhaps to advocate for women requires something of an acknowledgment; namely that society itself remains systemically sexist  Admittedly, in some countries, organisations and families, a great deal less sexist than others, but overall, sexist nevertheless. And as members of these countries, organisations and families, what does that say about us?

None of this is of course, ever made explicit. But it does explain why we might not want to admit that these injustices exist.  It’s not that we are afraid to fight injustices; rather, it’s that we feel an implicit accusation of sexism against ourselves. This is extremely uncomfortable, as it goes against our values; and so cognitive dissonance being what it is, we find ways to resist being an advocate on this issue. The key therefore, is for us to be able to recognise that there are sexist structures and practices which exist, without feeling that we are responsible for their creation.   It is perfectly possible to be male in a sexist society without being sexist, just as it’s perfectly possible to be white, straight or CIS in a racist, homophobic, anti-trans society without being a racist, homophobic, or anti-trans individual.  But - and here's where it is challenging - if we as individuals have benefited from an unjust system, then surely we have a minimal responsibility to examine and understand the injustices? We do not need to feel guilty but at the very least we need some humility and a willingness to listen when other peoples' experiences may be uncomfortable to hear.  If we do not, if we retreat into denial, then we may be unwittingly responsible for defending the indefensible. As parents and educators, we have a responsibility to find ways to bring students into that conversation without them feeling attacked for their privilege. It’s not easy, but it is important, and urgent.

So I have come to better understand the seemingly odd (to me, at least) reaction that decent people can have to certain issues, at least initially. Robin DiAngelo’s recent book White Fragility: Why It's So Hard for White People to Talk About Racism talks about exactly the same things in terms of race and racism in the USA; that non-racists resist being advocates against racism because to do so would be an admission that they have benefited from a racist system. I certainly don't agree with everything in that book, but the notion of fragility – whether white, male or straight – helps understand the personal reaction that can happen when we are confronted with systemic injustice, especially if we are the beneficiaries of that injustice.  I am not sure who said it, but the idea is captured in the phrase when you are accustomed to privilege, equality feels like discrimination. For me, this is an immensely helpful idea, and one that needs to be delicately approached, to allow conversations to flower into understanding, than than wither into polarisation and confrontation. 

Reference

DiAngelo, R. (2019) White Fragility: Why It's So Hard for White People to Talk About Racism.

Thanks to Ellie Alchin, Gemma Dawson, Shilpa Patel, Kathy Wallace for input here. Any errors -  still all mine :-)

**my colleague Shilpa Patel points out that this nay-saying can also be heard with respect to the Black Lives Matter movement:  Why don't we just say all lives matter? is the parallel retort.  The same points made above apply almost exactly here too.