AJC.com > Opinion > Woman to Woman > Archives > 2004 > August > 27 > Entry
Should we confront unintentional sexism?
Shaunti Feldhahn, a right-leaning columnist, writes the commentary this week and Diane Glass, a left-leaning columnist, responds.
Shaunti Feldhahn, a right-leaning columnist, writes the commentary this week and Diane Glass, a left-leaning columnist, responds.
Commentary
For much of my professional life, I have been one of few women in primarily male-dominated environments. My business school classes were 80 percent male, the Wall Street international-finance arena in which I worked was overwhelmingly male-dominated, and now as an author and consultant most of my publishing contacts and clients are men. Despite all that, I have never encountered intentional sexism from Americans. (I have from foreign banker associates, but that’s a cultural issue and a whole different story.)
However, I do run sometimes across unwitting sexism – usually a well-intentioned person who says something that inadvertently perpetuates stereotypes. In a few cases I’ve made a joke to lightly get the point across, but that’s as far as I will go. Because when the person is well-meaning, a pointed rejoinder seems counterproductive.
Last week I encountered one such example, from a woman, no less. I serve on several boards and was at the semi-annual meeting of one of them. I’m one of just two women out of 14 directors. Because the meeting was in an attractive location, many of the other board members were accompanied by their wives, who enjoyed the area while we worked.
It was a good meeting, but in the advance materials and during the days onsite I found myself frequently jarred by the verbiage of the staff member planning the event. When she addressed the whole group, she would say things like, “Board members, you should expect such-and-such. But women, while the meeting is going on, you might want to do this or that.�
I kept thinking, “What am I? Chopped liver?� But I didn’t say anything.
Why not? Wasn’t her use of language important? Wouldn’t her unconscious slips risk diminishing me and my lone female counterpart in the eyes of the other directors?
It’s appropriate to consider those concerns. But as always, other considerations took precedence. In this case, as a board member I was in a position of authority over this event planner – and she had been working 70-hour weeks to prepare for a complex meeting. She was exhausted, and had pulled off an incredible job. It was important for the directors to affirm her, not criticize her. And because I know her personality, I know that no matter how gently I said something, she would have been embarrassed and demoralized. All for the sake of a minor issue.
Some people believe that any such inadvertent statements must be addressed, because they could subtly undermine a woman’s authority in the eyes of others. But I don’t believe you can demand authority. Either you are respected by your peers or you aren’t – and that goes for both women and men. Changing language isn’t going to substantially alter how you are perceived – although repeatedly insisting on it might. In this case, I was secure enough in my contribution and perception within the group that I was willing to set aside a little irritation.
Confronting intentional sexism is a must. But tackling unintentional sexism is optional at best.
Rebuttal
The world is full of well-intentioned sexists. This doesn’t mean we ignore an opportunity to educate. Should a woman ignore a belittling comment because a sexist doesn’t know any better? Should she tell a joke in response? I’d argue no. Passing off sexist comments with “a joke� may not communicate clearly that the offender should stop this behavior. As uncomfortable as confrontation can be, it is better to be direct than to hedge around an issue. It also expends a lot less energy. This doesn’t mean Shaunti should have angrily blasted the unsuspecting naïf. But she could have kindly told her that this language should be modified for future board meetings. That’s it.
Shaunti’s event coordinator spoke to the wives of the majority of the board’s directors and used “women� as a shortcut to describe them as a group. We know she meant nothing by it. No one, not even a feminist, thinks this undermines a woman’s authority. It is dismissive, however. Women are directors and not just the wives of directors.
Saying nothing does nothing. Shaunti is left obviously unsatisfied having written this column and the woman will likely make the same mistake again, and perhaps insult someone in the future. Understandably, someone else who isn’t in a position of authority may want to blow off the comment, since she isn’t beholden to the woman.
But since Shaunti was in a position of authority, it was her responsibility to give the woman useful and constructive feedback, not criticism. Otherwise, effusive positive responses that cover up useful information don’t counsel, and thereby, don’t help. Assuming the woman is too fragile to take constructive feedback assumes she is powerless. This concept of powerlessness is the same quality that leads the event coordinator to assume that all board directors are naturally male.
Sexism is often unconscious because it is part of our consciousness. We are raised to think certain things about women, about minorities, about gay people, about ourselves. We carry these notions with us throughout our day unconsciously. We only become conscious of them when someone takes the time to educate us. This education can take the form of anger and resentment, a response that many times just puts someone on the defensive. This education can also take the form of gentle counsel or advice that is constructive. It also works to help everyone, really, since the woman is unlikely to make the same mistake twice.
Comments
Commenting is now closed for this entry.
By lozen
August 27, 2004 02:42 PM | Link to this
I’m struggling with this issue too. I work with an older man who says things like “thank you baby,” thank you honey,” to the three women in the office. Once he was complimenting one of the women (an African American woman) and said something like “you are looking good big mama.” He doesn’t “mean anything by it” but it makes us uncomfortable to say the least. We are support staff for him but we have a director who supervises all of us. This is in an academic setting and I’m surprised noone has confronted him about this before. Should I ask him not to call me honey and baby, or should I ask the director to speak with him? Or just ignore it as I have in the past?
By Diane Glass
August 27, 2004 03:08 PM | Link to this
I think it is fair to address this issue with your manager first, in an understanding way, since he is clearly from another generation. If this doesn’t work, however, then you need to speak to someone else.
By James F. Van Valkenburg
August 30, 2004 11:05 AM | Link to this
I am having trouble with this.
While being boorish and ill-mannered are not to be encouraged or condoned, threatening the person with as we in IBM call it, “a HR event”.
The politiaclly correct crowd has gone too far and made even simple things grounds for punishment. Unless it is directed toward a male, but only a white male.
As I said, being boorish and ill-mannered is not acceptable, and the receiver of unwanted attention, should speak up and let the person know it is not welcomed.
By Vincent
August 30, 2004 12:25 PM | Link to this
Respect and social awareness are two very different topics. Whether someone earns respect or not is an individual condition; social awareness is the understanding of people.
Unintentional sexism? Are you serious? Just using “unintentional” is the biggest scapegoat for excusing bigotry. And laziness. And arrogance.
Any person in the USA that is not a white heterosexual American born male is considered deviant. Just because that is “the way it has been and will always be”, is no excuse to tolerate it.
Women are still making less on the dollar than men in equal occupations. Women are still viewed as “risk” for corporate jobs, since they can get pregnant and might want to raise a baby. Women are still viewed as one of the following: mother, sister, wife, aunt, girlfriend, or mistress. Each of those roles reinforce the myth that the role of women is tending to the needs of man. And, these subservient roles dictate acceptance of the rules with no debate. So, when a woman questions this “unintentional sexism”, she is a b***, or a lesbian, or having PMS, or…
Any deviant minority in this country does not need to placate this very intentional bigotry for a second. Complacency feeds the stereotype and weakens posture.
There were some women who were taught to believe the “right to vote” in elections was for the man. Thank God the ones who wondered if they were chopped liver didn’t just sit by and say nothing.
By Debora
August 31, 2004 01:00 PM | Link to this
It makes me sad to remember the bigotry of prior generations because my grandparents were good, generous, kind, hard-working, honest people and loving in their hearts and that is what I wish to remember about them. However, growing up I had to listen to my elders speak of people as ni**rs, dagos, f*, Christ killers (slander for people who are of Jewish faith), spicks, the list goes on. My grandparents male neighbor referred to women as “go fetchers.” I was told to ignore this behavior because “they were people of their time.” I hope the people of my time are not excused so easily.
By Tymothe Larsgard
September 1, 2004 12:15 PM | Link to this
Sexism in the workplace, hmmmmm, I am soooooooo guilty. I am willing to bet the next mega million jackpot that we all are. Aren’t men supposed to kill bugs and empty the trash???? Little subtle innuendos are human nature and should be treated with humorous nonchalance.
Didn’t Sally make her point to Harry when she told him girls & boys can’t be friends.(Maybe it was Harry, but I like to think it was Sally). The differences are there to celebrate and use to our and our business’ advantage.
I think we have advanced to the theatre of the absurd, if we can no longer call a spade a spade. What would any of us call a group of women? Spices? (Plural for spouse) Save the confrontations for the big important stuff like the in-your-face overt sexisms.
We have come a long way-but let’s keep our sense of humor!
I would love to see equal pay for equal work.
I’m just like a woman jumping around all over the place, huh?
By Leon
September 1, 2004 03:38 PM | Link to this
Gosh, all of this discussion….the comments are all keen and forthwith, but I guess these all fit folks who have JOBS and Bosses or other employees to complain about…
If you are a professional and have been looking and looking and are still unemployed, many of these complaints would be trivia easily overlooked….my, you should be so lucky….A PAYCHECK!
By Ronald Millsaps
September 2, 2004 01:38 PM | Link to this
I won’t refute anyone who confronts unintentional sexism. I think people need to speak their minds more anyway. However, let’s remember that there is such a thing as female-male sexism. In our female-first society nowadays, there’s a ton of it, and it’s done in an unapologetic manner. Of course, the feminist movement shows no signs of caring, further demonstrating that they’re about inequality, not equality.
By RokChik
September 2, 2004 04:38 PM | Link to this
Ronald, maybe the feminist movement shows no signs of what you described, b/c our society is NOT a “female-first society” at all.
By Denise Noe
September 3, 2004 10:09 AM | Link to this
Shaunti Feldhahn was 100% right to be concerned about hurting someone’s feelings over an inadvertently sexist remark. Diane Glass is also right that Feldhahn should not have just let it slide. What she should have done was preface a correction by saying how much she appreciated the woman’s good works, made the correction, and finally soothed her feelings by complimenting her on the positive things she had done. You can correct someone without emotionally injuring them if you make it clear that it is one particular action that you are criticizing and not the person per se. By just letting it slide, Feldhahn made it more likely that the woman would repeat the error — perhaps to someone more thin-skinned but less sensitive to others’ feelings.
By Ronald Millsaps
September 3, 2004 11:15 AM | Link to this
RokChik—Better double-check that one. We do live in a female-first society. Yes, women do have their social struggles, but so do men. We tend to hear only about female social struggles, though, which is just one of the MANY double standards that oppose men. (Not to mention that a “struggle” women discuss is abortion “rights”, which never should be an option at all.) Sure, sexism of any kind warrants a response. Speaking up is good. Men should do so when trying to provide for their family and are accused of “depriving” their wives of their spot in the workplace. This is just one example. I’m just tired of hearing about how women have it so hard when we never hear about how men have it hard. This is just one of the many double standards in our current society. Sure, speak up against sexism. I just did. If we can get as many men to speak up as women do, maybe we can get back to equal rights.