Yes, the word 'uppity', particularly when applied to Black folks, is racist. When we started Uppity Girl Productions, it was a reference to the way my dad joked about my how mouthy I was as a child. In 2020, I learned more about the word and had a plan to rename our small initiative. Then the pandemic arrived and we were focused on other efforts to help women in crisis. But that is no excuse. We are changing our name and interested in your ideas. Let us know what you think we should call our initiative which advocates for equality and ensuring agency for women, girls and trans people.
Talk Less, Help Others Talk More
I grew my career on problem solving and developing expertise. It served me well but in the last five years I have learned some hard lessons that have made me question my default to jump in and solve problems. Too much emphasis on the ‘right’ answer and the belief that the leaders know best, has not been helpful to my leadership or my experience as a follower. I have been trying to shift my perspective from problem solver to facilitator or steward. Lately that takes the form of talking less and helping others talk more. I developed a real dependence on being an expert, and it was very satisfying. I listened to respond instead of to understand. Now I am focused on trying to create an environment that helps others find opportunities to talk and share their ideas or solutions. It is a big change and I can only keep my opinions to myself about a quarter of the time. On the upside, I have heard perspectives and ideas that would never have occurred to me, and I hope I have created more space for others to engage. Philanthropy needs more listening and less talking. The only way to overcome the power differential between people who have money and the organizations and people who need it, is to stop prescribing solutions. Stop thinking you know better than the people who are actually living the experience.
Pay Equity Isn’t About You
One of the very fortunate aspects of my day job is a CEO who is open to different perspectives. This matters to me because I think so much of what we have been led to believe works in organizations is just not true, particularly when it comes to HR practices. As part of an effort to build a more diverse, equitable and inclusive organization, we undertook a pay equity assessment. In the past, I have used unadjusted pay equity assessments to determine whether we were paying fairly and equitable. An unadjusted pay equity assessment compares the average and/or median pay in an organization for specific groups of people. An adjusted pay equity assessment measures the pay gap after adjusting for various factors such as type of occupation, education and experience that might influence the pay gap. Both can be useful and important when understanding how different groups, particularly underrepresented groups, are compensated. This year, with the assistance of Pay Analytics, experts in pay equity assessment, I completed an adjusted pay equity assessment, which highlight pay gaps for women and women of colour. This means that women, when controlling for other factors such as the type of role, were paid about 7% less than men.
With the support of the CEO, I set out to correct this pay gap. So far, so good. What came next was probably predictable but always surprising. It is hard to find a leader who thinks, or at least would admit to thinking that people should not be paid differently due to their gender or any other demographic identity. But like most aspects of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion, conceptual belief and support starts to fall apart when actual behaviour change is required. I met with a fair amount of resistance as I tried to adjust specific salaries to ensure equity. Most of this resistance was not about performance, but about, well, the leader’s ego. They ‘knew’ their people better than I did.Didn’t I trust them not to be unbiased? Well, actually, no. I don’t trust them to be unbiased, just like I don’t trust myself or anybody else to be unbiased. More importantly, a pay equity assessment isn’t about an individual leader. It is about a system. Arguing about whether specific people are biased or discriminatory misses the big picture. Systems are biased. A pay equity assessment looks at the organization, a system, to determine whether people are paid unfairly.
Our good intentions as individuals don’t really matter when it comes to bias. My values may be vehemently opposed to inequity, inequality, discrimination and prejudice. But that doesn’t mean I am not biased and it definitely doesn’t mean I am not contributing to the systemic prejudice. Ironically, many of the managers I was working with, felt the pay equity adjustments were not fair, even though the changes meant that at least temporarily, we reduced the pay gap to less than 1%. Fortunately, this sense of fairness meant we had common ground and shared goals. Most decided to accept the changes, although some very reluctantly. It is a good thing I believe we just have to get a little better every day to make progress.
The Coronavirus is Not the Great Equalizer
The last few months have changed the world more than we could have ever imagined. Many people have experienced suffering, loss of life, job loss, economic insecurity and isolation. We have also experienced generosity, integrous leadership, kindness and courage. Media coverage has been unrelenting in a way that suggest there is no other news. Early in the pandemic, a narrative developed that the Coronavirus is the great equalizer. This narrative was perpetuated by politicians like Governor Cuomo and other well-known people such as Madonna (oddly, from a bathtub).
I understand the intent of characterizing Coronavirus as an equalizer. Although we are still trying to understand the nature of this virus, it appears there is no group of people that is immune. Yes, in theory, all people can develop covid 19 and in that sense, it doesn’t discriminate. But practically, Coronovirus, like all crises, discriminates.
The pandemic is a very different experience if you:
Don’t have adequate healthcare
Don’t have a place to self-isolate
Don’t have access to proper hygiene facilities
Don’t have paid sick leave
Don’t have a job
Don’t have support if you are sick
Don’t have job flexibility that allows you to work from home
Don’t have job flexibility that allows you to care for children no longer in school
Rely on public transit
Cannot access emergency funds if needed
Rely on non-profit facilities that are temporarily closed
Are forced to quarantine with abusers
Are subjected to bias in the healthcare system
Are the target of racism
Are vulnerable and dependent on others for care
Are governed by leaders who are not dedicated to serving your best interests
All of us are impacted by Coronovirus, but not all of us are impacted equally.
Diversity Doesn’t Begin & End with Binary Gender
For the last three years, I have been immersed in trying to understand, manage and make progress towards building more diverse and inclusive organizations. Depending on the day, I feel tentatively optimistic that we are delivering small positive results, or frustrated and discouraged that nothing is changing and every conversation is like Groundhog Day.
A particular challenge for diversity and inclusion in organizations is an almost exclusive focus on binary gender. Maybe this is understandable given the last few years and the prevalence of media coverage of sexual assaults, something which has only recently gained attention. It is also true that the fight for human rights has never treated all groups of people equally. In Canada, Indigenous people were only given the right to vote in 1960, long after women fought for and achieved their own voting rights.
Perhaps because binary gender seems to be more ‘knowable’ to us, or perhaps because of how society (slowly) changes and evolves, organizations, particularly in Canada, have been largely focused on equity and representation for women and the unspoken but prevalent perspective is white women.
The feminist movement has often been criticized for representing primarily white women, without considering or supporting women of colour, LGBTQ++ and transgendered people, and women who are differently abled. Based on my experience in organizations, this single focus undermines our diversity and inclusion efforts.
I believe a diverse and inclusive organization is one in which the mix of people is deep, rich and complex. Of course a diverse organization includes women, at all levels and in all roles, but what is frustrating is the continued view that binary gender representation is where this effort starts and ends. I understand and realize it is not intentional, but isn’t that the point? Without being very deliberate and intentional, we will not build truly diverse and inclusive organizations.
I applaud organizations, especially tech organizations, that are lauded for progress that has been made to create binary gender equity in their companies. For a long time I have been an advocate of gender equality and a feminist. I support organizations that are making meaningful change to the experience and representation of women in their companies. But to date, that conversation and attention has been far too narrowly focused.
The New York Times recently published an article titled “Study Examines Why Black Americans Remain Scarce in the Executive Suite,” and one of the reasons cited is white women aren’t using using new power to advocate for other underrepresented groups. Black professionals in the study were more likely than white professionals to say that the primary beneficiaries of diversity and inclusion efforts have been white women.
As a white woman, I am keenly aware of how my opportunities and experience in organizations, for many reasons, is much different than other people’s experiences, particularly those from underrepresented groups. I need to actively support other underrepresented people in organizations and still have much work to do in order to figure out the best way to champion others. One thing I am trying to do is broaden the diversity and inclusion conversation to be truly inclusive.
Diversity and Inclusion: Your Belief in the Cause, Isn't Enough
It’s back to school and at Hootsuite, this means we will soon be completing our third annual diversity and inclusion survey. Last year about 60% of our organization participated in this voluntary, anonymous survey that asked questions about the different ways employees identify themselves, but also about the employee experience as it relates to diversity and inclusion. The results of that survey, while not unexpected, were frustrating. Like many tech organizations, we aren’t satisfied with our progress in building a diverse and a more inclusive organization. It is safe to say Hootsuite is pretty homogenous. Mostly White and largely male, in critical areas like software engineering and leadership. We have, of course, made positive impacts. Early results from a new promotion process, indicate the new process is contributing to more opportunities for people in underrepresented groups. We have redesigned our interview and selection process, and have strong adoption in specific groups and key aspects of the process.
My frustration stems from our lack of progress in shifting the composition of the organization, and the disparity between the experiences of people from underrepresented groups versus dominant groups. It’s not surprising that people who identify with groups that are underrepresented in the company feel less positive about belonging, fairness, decision making and diversity in the organization. While I believe we are on the right track to change, I am impatient and wonder how much change can be created with evolution instead of revolution.
In many organizations—particularly technology companies—we have put our faith in the often-cited meritocracy, and in our ability to be personally objective in the face of implicit bias, despite research showing both can make bias more persistent.
At Hootsuite, we have approached the change required to create a more diverse and inclusive organization at an individual level but also at a structural or systemic level, creating the infrastructure and processes to mitigate bias and enable more inclusive decision making. But for technology organizations, structure and process is not always a welcome solution. Hootsuite is an organization where agility and speed are a badge of honour. While the first step towards change is the conceptual agreement that a more diverse and inclusive organization is not only the right thing to do—but also critical to the organization’s long-term success—at some point we need to take the step from theoretical commitment to actual commitment. I will admit these days I am feeling a little fed up with the excuses that often pop up with respect to hiring. All the reasons we don’t have enough patience and time to build a diverse candidate pool for critical senior leadership hires, or why the hiring profile is based on requirements that almost guarantee you won’t find a woman or person of colour to fill the role. Especially at senior levels, if our definition of a successful candidate is based on our historical understanding of organizations and the sustaining systems, we will never hire anything but white men. You need someone who has done a COO role for 10 years? How many women or people of colour were given that opportunity in the last decade?
I am a big fan of Jeffery Pfeffer’s work, particularly The Knowing Doing Gap, which examines why we often fail to turn knowledge into action. If we want to make meaningful change and build a diverse and inclusive organization, it’s not enough to be a theoretical believer, to be a fan of the game, but not an actual player.
Results require the discipline to stick to plans and processes, without making exceptions or cutting corners. Anything we choose to do requires effort, and investment. There is a ‘cost’ of some sort, extracted for change. If there was nothing demanded of us, change would be easy.
Building a diverse and inclusive organization is a long-term commitment, and the challenge for leaders is discipline and a willingness to match action with words.
Talking about the "F Word" for International Women's Day
I was invited by Clearly Contacts, to talk about feminism at their celebration of International Women's Day. Here is the script from the talk:
Let’s just get this out of the way . I am a Feminist. An All caps, unapologetic, enthusiastic and yes, sometimes angry feminist. My definition of a feminist is someone who believes in the social, political, and economic equality of the sexes. In fact, I am an advocate for human rights. But I agree with Adiche when she says that using the term feminism as equivocal to “human rights” denies the fact that there are specific and particular problems that women face.
It turns out that I, as an unapologetic feminist, am in the minority in Canada, where only 20% of the people identify as feminists. Another 39% say they are agree somewhat that they are feminists. These are, perhaps the people who say they believe in equality, but they aren’t feminists because they aren’t angry man-haters..
Let’s talk about that.
This is one of the biggest criticisms about the word feminism. This story about what feminism represents. Feminism by its definition is about equal value of the sexes. And if we want to get more accurate, it is about equal value of people irrespective of their gender. Advocating for women is not saying women are better. It is saying that currently women have not got the same opportunities and freedoms as men. And that needs to change.
Which brings us to anger.
Uh ya we are mad. Can we expect anything less? We are talking about inequality and social injustice. Somebody didn't just steal our parking spot. We have been fighting this fight for a long time. Pardon me if i am a little cheesed off.
The other criticism I often hear about feminism is one of political correctness. I work at a local tech company and part of my mandate is diversity and inclusion. Recently I had a conversation with a senior leader who insisted that our diversity and inclusion efforts would not be allowed to turn into a race to political correctness and vanilla. Let me give you a little context. The majority of our organization is white and over 3/4 of senior leadership are men. The tech industry is a double scoop of vanilla right now and it has nothing to do with feminism and political correctness.
When i was thinking about what I wanted to talk about tonight, I was doing some reading and I came across an article on medium.com titled Political Correctness and Feminism is Making Us Weak.
This article was written by Lance Navarro who is in his twenties and has written other gems like Why Men Need to be Dangerous and Tinder is Not For Making Friends.
These are Lance’s thoughts on feminism and political correctness:
I believe, that feminism is a movement of overly sensitive individuals who still believe that women are being perpetually mistreated and abused by this mystical force called “the patriarchy.”
So there it is. If you want to level the most damning criticism at feminists, you can call us angry or overly sensitive.
Given these criticisms, it may be natural to want to distance ourselves from the word feminist. To try and sanitize it and make it more palatable.
But I don’t think it is helpful to sanitize it. Feminism Is a movement for change and trying to water it down or make it more mainstream, misses the point
In 2010 I co-founded a project called Uppity Girl Productions which uses media to highlight issues affecting women and girls, because I believe women should have control over their own lives. We have used these events to raise money and awareness about the experiences of women and girls. We called it uppity girl because when I was young, if I got sassy with my father, in other words, if I challenged his power, he would call me uppity.
Feminism is challenging power structures. Its asking us to rethink the way the world works. And that makes some people feel insecure.
Two years ago I was in Rwanda working with a group of women who were part of a year long program. During the 1994 genocide, 1.1 million people were killed in under 3 months. A significant portion of those killed were men and boys. Following the genocide, they estimate that 60-70% of the population was female. The President mandated that at least 30% of the government roles needed to be filled by women. Encouragingly, over time, this number grew and now about 60% of the govt is filled by women. More than Canada, where we elected only about 25% women in the 2015 election.
But even in Rwanda, women continue to face discrimination, because the existing system is difficult to shift. The women I worked with were angry that they were still responsible for the vast majority of unpaid work in households and were surprised to find this is still an issue in Canada.
It is tempting to believe that feminism is no longer necessary in Canada.
But There are still pay gaps, particularly if you are a woman of colour, indigenous or living with a disability.
60% of university grads are women and 82% are entering the workforce. But women put in twice as many hours as men in unpaid work.
Childcare is Canada is among the mostly costly in the world.
We still do not have representation on boards or senior leadership.
Safety continues to be an issue for women in Canada, particularly for indigenous women. There are still judges who suggest that a woman should keep her knees closed if she wants to avoid sexual assault.
Our work is not done here or anywhere else in the world.
Change will not come if we are reluctant about our commitment, if we try to qualify it.
We must all stand for feminism. Unapologetically.
Anita Hill And The Fight For Equality
Last night I saw Anita Hill speak at the University of British Columbia on Gender, Race and Power in the Academy. Anita Hill is an author, attorney and academic professor who accused then Supreme Court Justice nominee of sexual harassment. I remember watching the televised hearing and doubting Hill's testimony because the accusations seemed so terrible and odd that I assumed it all couldn't be true. Of course, my perspective was heavily influenced by a world which may have been evolving but was still largely dominated by men. As much as it pains me to admit this, I think unconsciously I was skeptical of Anita Hill's story simply because she was a woman.
Listening to Anita Hill speak about the many gains but also many barriers women and many others still face, was a reminder that there is still miles to go before we sleep. While Ms. Hill was remarkable and amazing, the part of the evening that really impacted me was an introduction by Cecilia Point, a spokesperson of the xʷməθkʷəy̓əm (Musqueam) people. Cecilia Point was a key activist against the development of land in Vancouver that was once an ancient village and burial site of the Musqueam people. Ms Point spoke of women, like Anita Hill, who came before us, and who we must honour by continuing to fight for gender equality, the rights of Canada's Indigenous People and the rights of all marginalized people.
What We're Watching
Two recommendations for your viewing pleasure:
Georgie Girl: Born George, one-time prostitute-turned-politician Georgina Beyer was elected to New Zealand's Parliament in 1999, becoming the world's first transgender person to hold a national office. Amazingly, a mostly white, conservative, rural constituency voted this former sex worker of Maori descent into office
What Tomorrow Brings: What Tomorrow Brings goes inside the very first girls’ school in a small Afghan village. Never before have fathers here allowed their daughters to be educated; now Taliban threats heighten their misgivings. From the school’s beginnings in 2009 to its first graduating class in 2015, the film traces the interconnected stories of students, teachers, village elders, parents and school founder Razia Jan. While the girls learn to read and write, their education goes far beyond the classroom as they discover the differences between the lives they were born into and the lives they dream of leading
Books You Should Be Reading
Uppity Girls are reading and you should be too! Here are the books we recommend:
Brotopia by Emily Chang - The Bloomberg technology journalist writes about how Silicon Valley grew with rampant sexism, despite having utopian ideals and dreams of meritocracy, why a bro-culture endures, and how women are finally starting to speak out and fight back.
Technically Wrong: Sexist Apps, Biased Algorithms, and Other Threats of Toxic Tech by Sara Wachter-Boettcher - A revealing look at how tech industry bias and blind spots get baked into digital products―and harm us all.
Delusions of Gender: How Our Minds, Society, and Neurosexism Create Difference by Cordelia Fine - Drawing on the latest research in neuroscience and psychology, Cordelia Fine debunks the myth of hardwired differences between men's and women's brains, unraveling the evidence behind such claims as men's brains aren't wired for empathy and women's brains aren't made to fix cars.
Learning Lessons
Two weeks ago, my CEO made a very public comment that was construed by many to be offside, inappropriate, and homophobic. Some people felt it was indicative of the bro culture plaguing many tech companies. Some, no doubt, didn't even pay attention. The comment, via Twitter, opened up a dialogue amongst employees after a particularily courageous individual questioned the CEO's apology on Facebook at Work.
One thing was clear, there were a multitude of opinions and perspectives on the issue and related impacts. Some perspectives were baffling to me and some were enraging. Some were expected and some enhanced my viewpoint. It is reassuring to believe there are universal truths in the world and no doubt, there are a small number. But mostly, despite how passionate we feel about our own perspective, there are complicated, nuanced and grey truths.
As the dialogue, condemnation, and even absolution continued into a second week, International Women's Day was upon us. This is where I made my own mistake, missing an opportunity to demonstrate a presence for the organization, on a day that is of critical importance, and more so given recent events. This was brought to my attention by a group of women in the organization who wrote an open letter, protesting the organization's lack of presence on Women's Day and the impact that had on them and others in the organization.
As the person responsible for diversity and inclusion in the organization, I don't have an excuse. I missed a chance to create more inclusion in the organization. I can rationalize it in my own mind, but the explanation doesn't matter. What I appreciate is the groups's willingness to speak up, to state their perspective and to offer alternatives and solutions.
The Women of Standing Rock
The stand-off at Standing Rock continues as many people from all walks of life protest the crude oil pipeline route through North Dakota and sacred Lakota Sioux land.
The protest was started by a group of Lakota Sioux women who established the Scared Stones Camp in North Dakota to protest the building of the Dakota Access Pipeline through their land and water supply. The crude oil pipeline was supposed to pass the Missouri River north of Bismarck, but concerns about oil leaks polluting the drinking water of the state capitol resulted in the pipeline routing plan through the Standing Rock Sioux Tribal land.
One leader of this effort, Ladonna Brave Bull Allard started the Scared Stone camp on the banks of the Cannonball river. As construction of the pipeline began, Allard made a small video and posted it on Facebook, asking people to help. Since that day in July, people continue to join the protest at Standing Rock.
The US Election - I am not Over It
Its all over but the crying. The greatest nation in the world (does anybody still believe that moniker) elected a racist, sexist asshat with absolutely no political experience and no credible business experience. I. Can't. Even. Many great articles have been written about the US election and the unfathomable outcome. Garrison Keillor wrote a fantastic article in the Washington Post about how we live with this calousally bad decision. Gloria Steinem is undaunted by the results and argues for eschewing mourning in favour of organizing. She is, after all, a veteran of fighting for gender equality. By the way, my cat Gloria Steinem is in favour of chewing and getting kitty spit all over magazine articles about Trump.
This is what I thought when I woke up to the election results: now you mofos have gone and done it. F*ck. Really. I can't be more intelligent or polite than that and believe me, I have tried. Initially, there was some cautious optimism as Trump began unraveling all his bile and hate spewed during the campaign. Then he appointed a right-wing extremist as his Chief Strategist. Fear not, as Alexandra Petri writes, it's not like he's literally Joseph Goebbels. I know I feel better. I have taken a little break from social media because the f*ckery was just too much. I know Trump was elected fairly, as fairly as the American electoral process of hanging chads and identification demands for already underrepresented demographics can be, but I am not mature enough to accept the results without alternating between sulking and throwing my toys out of the pram. I just need to complain about it for another week or at least until this stinker of a year is over (really? Bowie and Cohen???). I still have a few rants left before I can move on to new injustices.
The Heart of Agency is Financial Independence
A few months ago I took a trip to Rwanda with Women for Women International. W4W helps marginalized women living in countries affected by war and conflict, offering support, tools, and the opportunity to move from crisis and poverty to stability and economic self-sufficiency. I participated in a session with Rwandan women learning about property rights. Through translators, it become clear that the issues the Rwandan women were facing were similar to many of the issues women around the world and in North America experience. In particular, the Rwandan women were surprised to hear that equal pay is still an issue in Canada and the United States.
A large portion of the trip focused on meeting with cooperatives the women join after graduating from the W4W programs. Financial independence is the cornerstone of the program and critical to women having agency, no matter what country they live in. The W4W cooperatives generate income for the women in a variety of ways, from agriculture to basket making to money lending. The women generate income for themselves and their families but the financial independence also has a wider impact on the community. The program requires women to be part of a cooperative because it helps ensure success through support and interconnection.
Kidnapped Nigerian Girl Rescued
Two years after 219 Chibok girls were kidnapped by Boko Haram in Nigeria, a 19 year old woman has been found. Members of the Civilian Joint Taskforce, a vigilante group created to fight Boko Haram, discovered the woman in a forest when she was searching for firewood. She indicated that most of the original 219 kidnapped girls are alive.
This is positive news after many attempts to locate the girls. However, it highlights the generally ineffective and inadequate responses to a terrorist organization holding over 200 people hostage. The initial outrage did not withstand time and like all atrocities we adapt a little each day until it seems normal that 219 women and girls are enslaved.
When it comes to gender bias, you can't change one mind at a time
Despite years of focus on gender diversity in the workplace, women are still largely underrepresented in management, boards, and specific industries/functions. A new Harvard study highlights one of the barriers at work in the hiring process. Unconscious bias makes it difficult to address gender diversity. Some thinking indicates that while people do not generally actively discriminate against an individual based on race or gender, they discriminate in favour of those people who they most identify with. The Harvard Study found that people also have a bias around preserving the status quo. Which means that the number of women in your candidate pool materially affects decisions around hiring. When three out of four candidates were women, respondents were more likely to hire a woman. When only one woman was in the candidate pool, the chance of a woman being hired was essentially zero. It seems that the percentage of women in the candidate pool tells the respondents something about status quo. Namely, that the percentage of women is reflective of reality and the status quo. Going against the status quo is deemed risky and when the status quo appears to endorse the idea that women as potential candidates is not typical (i.e. They represent a small % of the pool), respondents want to reinforce not contradict the status quo.
Words Matter
When the philosopher Heidegger wrote, “language is the house of being,” he was making a link between language and our experiences. Language and our choice of words, influences and shapes our perception and interpretation of what we experience. Recently, a reporter discovered the impact of word choice, referring to the sexual abuse of a 13 year old as a “tryst.” Media coverage, and our own discourse, particularly in social media, has an impact not only on what we pay attention to but also how we view that situation. Sometimes our lack of thoughtfulness about word choice negatively impacts our view of a situation. But often there is an intentional and systematic use of language designed to shape our perspective.
Femifesto is a feminist organization that is working to shift rape culture to consent culture. One of their first big projects was publishing Use The Right Words: Media Reporting on Sexual Violence in Canada, a free guide for journalists reporting on sexual violence. Media coverage determines not only what gets our attention but also how we interpret what we are hearing and seeing. Coverage, whether by formal media or through our own discourse, particularly in social media, continues to shame and blame survivors of sexual violence, perpetuating misogyny and an inherent devaluing of women.
More Skills But Let's Fix The Root
I love the idea of ensuring girls have the skills to take control of their own lives, and build independence. An experiment to teach girls negotiation skills is trying to determine whether it can increase the likelihood that girls will find resources to fund their education. A great solution for a symptom, but I don't believe it addresses the root of the problem: why are girls denied the same rights as boys?
http://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2015/10/08/446237057/can-t-afford-school-girls-in-zambia-learn-to-negotiate-the-harvard-way-15girls
Women and War
The Toronto Film Festival included a documentary about the first all women Peace Keeping Unit. Called Journey of A Thousand Miles, the film tells the story of a unit of United Nations Peacekeepers comprised entirely of Muslim women from Bangladesh. Currently, there are just three all female units in the UN's 100,000 person peacekeeping force.
In contrast, the USA armed services’ decision to widen access to direct combat roles for women, is causing controversy and debate as all branches of the military have until 2016 to decide which positions, if any, they want to keep off-limits for women. A much sited study indicated women suffer greater i juries than men and if the idea is to build the most lethal and effective units, it is in the best interest of everybody to keep women out of combat roles. Most of those arguments fail to mention findings that women display more mental fitness than men, a critical component of effectiveness in combat.
The Peacekeeper documentary highlights the all-women unit's tendency to focus on community policing instead of zero tolerance policy or aggressive forced compliance. While not in combat, the all-female peace keeping unit demonstrates that women bring unique skills to the situations. As they will in combat roles. Excuses for keeping the military segregated sexual dynamics in co-ed units, inferior physical capabilities and "complications" such as pregnancy. These are all excuses and no different than the manufactured reasons used to maintain racial segregation many years before.
Catholic Nuns Are Feminists Too
Evrybody is excited because Pope Francis told Priests they could forgive women who have had abortions. How magnaimous of the Pope. It is hard not to like the gentleman in the pointy cap, particularly when compared to past Popes, this recent instruction is a reminder that women around the world still lack fundamental rights and freedoms. Women are sytematically and routinely denied reproductive rights and freedoms. They are unable to choose if and when they get pregnant, and are subjected to female genital mutilation, child bride marriages, and forced sex as minors.
In response to the Pope, the American Association of Nuns penned a response, which in a very polite way essentially told the Pope to mind his own business. The gist of their response? Nobody, including the Catholic Church, gets to dictate what a woman chooses to do with her body. In other words, butt out, and take your forgiveness with you.