I went to see Geena Davis speak a few weeks ago when she was visiting Seattle. Davis is the founder of The Geena Davis Institute on Gender in Media and See Jane. She spoke on a panel with Christine Grumm, former CEO of the Women’s Funding Network, and the title of the presentation was “How Girls Can Save the World.” I thought it was a rather grand and sweeping claim/name for the event, but I’ll get back to that later. First, I want to get to the one point that stuck in my head on March 12, and is still sticking there, like caramel in my molars.
Davis said that women’s level of participation across many sectors of society—in media (entertainment and journalism), companies, and organizations of all sorts—seems to stall out at 17%. It’s like we reach some imaginary quota and think ‘we’re done,’ she said. And what imaginary quota could that be, I wonder? Perhaps the ‘Phew, we’ve finally surpassed 10%’ benchmark or the ‘Yay, there are two of us in the room instead of only one’ exultation?
I say that because I’ve felt it. Having worked in software engineering and other technology jobs, I’ve been the one woman at the conference room table. I’ve also worked on teams where I wasn’t the only one, but was there 50% representation? No. The weird part is I never expected there to be.
Why is this? Why has 17%-ish seemed pretty okay to me (and lots of others)? One reason could be that it’s all we’ve ever seen, and it’s what we’re used to seeing. The numbers have never been anywhere near 50% in some sectors. Women are just not fully represented in all the places they could be—places that wield influence—even in the world of make believe: Davis said she has data that shows that the more hours of TV a girl watches, the fewer career options she thinks she has. (She also said, incidentally, that in a poll of viewers of her short-lived TV show Commander in Chief they said they’d now be more likely to vote for a female president. That’s the power of television.)
Christine Grumm is adamant that more women need to understand finance and economics and be engaged in politics so that we have more equal gender representation at those tables. The fact that we’re missing representation in certain sectors leads me to wonder if there’s something about the education system that scares girls away from these fields. There must be something to the notion, since institutions like Seattle Girls’ School have popped up to tackle just that. One section of its website reads “In 2000, a small group of concerned south Seattle parents read about the disturbing trend of girls dropping out of the study of math, science, and technology in their adolescent years. Not wanting to see their daughters lose their confidence before finding their competence, these parents formed the beginnings of Seattle Girls’ School.” I’d like to know more about SGS’s teaching approach, and how it differs.
Back to the title of the event, “How Girls Can Save the World.” To me, it conjures up an image of young ladies riding in on tall horses and pulling a faltering world away from the brink of failure or destruction just in time. Well, first off, I don’t think of the world as being in such a dire state that it needs saving (environmental concerns being the exception.) Second, I do think that more girls involved in more stuff would make the world a better place (fewer wars, maybe?), but half of the effort still has to come from men. It’s a good thing that our approaches complement each other, because we ain’t goin’ nowhere without them. If it were my talk, I’d call it “How Girls and Boys Can Create a Better World Together.” I know. Not as sexy and a bit wordy, huh? Let’s try “HGBCCBWT,” then (which kind of reminds me of my nickname for my pug dog, “HBKKPT,” or Hunchy-Back Knocky-Knees Pigeon-Toed.)
In the meantime, I’m going to change the way I look at 17%. While three points higher than Mitt Romney’s effective tax rate for 2010, it’s still a pretty puny number. To start, I’ll raise the bar on my own expectations. And the topic could make for good conversation the next time I’m at a corporate conference table and feel compelled to do a head count.
Jo VonBargen says
Fascinating, Laura! Boiled down, we’re limited by our own expectations? I’m quite sure that’s a fact. The answer has been right there under our noses all along, hasn’t it? What a wonderful, thought-provoking piece you have here!!
Laura Zera says
Yes, and I think we don’t even realize after a while what some of those limiting expectations are. It’s always good to have a jolt (like this talk did for me) to illuminate them. Thanks for your comment, Jo.
Chris James says
Very nice post, Laura. I think the problem is still that attitudes are taking far too long to change. I work for a very progessive firm which actively allows high-performing women the freedom also to raise families, but this is still rare in the industry. Like most aspects of human relationships, it all boils down to control. But anyway, well done for writing about this problem in such a measured way.
Laura Zera says
Thanks, Chris. It can be glacial sometimes, hey? Maybe if we hit the 33% critical mass for equal representation things would start moving more quickly. Yay for progressive firms! When you say it boils down to control, do you mean that in the power sense, e.g. (s)he who holds the power, hangs on to the power?
Chris James says
Oh, absolutely. Men are always threatened by capable, successful women and most of them just can’t cope. I work in the Warsaw office of a global firm and it’s interesting to see how the firm’s global policies clash with the sexism that is still strong in this country. We many very capable women working here and you can see how uncomfortable the men are having to work with them. To be fair, most men here can control themselves, but we have a few that are nothing more than bullies: they just don’t get it. So I think it’s still going to take time…
Jodi Lobozzo Aman says
So much to say about this. I do think the feminine will lead the way out of our predicament. Economics are in trouble also! But it is the feminine inside each one of us. Men and women. It is about balance. This is the topic of my book! Yeah! Go Geena!
Laura Zera says
That’s it! The feminine inside each one of us. Yes. It’s not simply gender, it’s also the feminine that is important to change. Thanks for adding that, Jodi.
Caleb Pirtle says
If women can save the world, I am ready to give it to you. Men have certainly made a mess of it worldwide. Unfortunately, greed and ambition and ego long ago replaced common sense, and we are all left to suffer.
Laura Zera says
Your comment made me chuckle, Caleb, but I think it’s more about certain, specific people than the gender. Unfortunately, we have a lot of greed-, ambition-, and ego-driven people out there calling the shots.
Kathy Lynn Hall (@RedMojoMama) says
I had to read this – love Geena Davis, for one and secondly, great subject. I’m fascinated with the Seattle Girl’s School – their reason for existence. How wonderful to take a proactive approach. Also, the TV watching phenomena, seems logical to me, although I wonder if it might not have the same effect on boys, just because TV is so limited in its portrayal of not-so-glamorous occupations.
Thank you for the post. Really enjoyed it.
Laura Zera says
Thanks, Kathy! Yeah, Geena Davis is a force of nature. And you raise a very interesting question. Given what studies have said about violence on television affecting kids of both genders, it would stand to reason. TV is just so powerful in its influence.
Kelley says
You should see the look on people’s faces when they find out that I’m an app developer! They all raise an eyebrow and say something along the lines of “No…wait, really?” Again, it comes down to expectations; people expect all tech people to look like Mark Zuckerberg, rather than a young lady like me.
Another thought about Seattle Girls’ School: I went to/graduated from an all women’s college and I think there is something to say about them. Smith was like going to war because I literally had to compete with some of the most capable and intelligent people that I have ever encountered. Being in that environment for 4 years completely changed my perspective. I expect women to lead groups, I expect women to share their opinions, and I expect women to take on take on the challenges that no one else will touch. Consequently, I expect to do all of those things myself.
Interestingly enough, I got my Ballpoint job because another Smith alum (Susan) took a chance on me. Talk about being in a male-dominated field, Susan Leigh Babcock is the only CEO of a software development company that I know of!
Really great post, it totally got me thinking! 🙂
Laura Zera says
Ha, I can only imagine, Kelley! Yours is a great story, and I hope there are more and more like yours. And your point about your Smith experience is interesting. I hadn’t thought about all-girls’/women’s schools like that before, but I can imagine it would remove so much of the ‘crap’ and just let the students get on with it.
Christina Carson says
I remember reading years ago how certain native tribes, when making decisions, formed two circles. The men were in the inner one and the women around them. The men would slice out the problem and then hand it over their shoulders to the woman behind them, and with the more contingency type of thinking women can do so well, they would assess all the flaws, weakness, the “if this than that” ramifications. Then they would hand it back and with that the men would proceed to come to a decision. We need the balance of the genders, and we need to provide it in a way that doesn’t further disrupt the most important task fathers and mothers still have – raising healthy, centered, loved children.
Laura Zera says
I’d love to have the opportunity to play with that process in a formal setting — work or school — somewhere down the road. Wouldn’t that be a cool exercise to try out? Thanks for sharing, Christina. I always love your perspective.
Pamela Skjolsvik says
Well, we certainly only aim for what we think is possible and if we can’t see a table full of female scientists, we don’t think it’s possible. For years, nobody thought they could break the three minute mile. Once it was done, everyone who wanted to broke that barrier.
Laura Zera says
Absolutely true. I saw a clip of Aaron Sorkin on The Colbert Report yesterday. Colbert was talking to Sorkin about the criticism he always gets for writing ‘elevated’ dialogue in a way that people will never actually speak. Sorkin’s response was something to the effect of “well, if people hear it and want to improve their conversation skills, then maybe they’ll try to do it and go for it more after they’ve seen it on TV.” In other words, he’s trying to combat the dumbing down of America. We can certainly do the same thing with representation of women through the media. Thanks, Pamela!