There’s been some interesting feedback on some of the pieces we’ve published this week, particularly the ones about women in cabinet and the new funding announcement for domestic violence. Much of it was encouraging, which is lovely, but the rest can be summed up in one phrase: “why do you have to be so negative?”
When I say interesting, I actually do mean that I find it that perspective quite fascinating. It reminds me of the Geena Davis quoting research that said when there’s a group that has 33 percent women, the men perceive it being more women in the room than men. Perception distorts their reality and women have dominated, rather than just been present.
Why, when women say that less than 25 percent of people in cabinet is not equal representation are they being “negative”?
I went back and checked every piece we published, and all of them stated unequivocally that the changes were a good start, but they’re not enough. Less than a quarter of cabinet and less than twenty percent of the outer ministry is not equal representation of women.
Some extra funding for domestic violence is a good start, that it was Turnbull’s first announcement and that he was so clear about family violence being a gendered issue is a promising beginning, but it’s not enough. Not nearly enough.
Nearly 20,000 calls to 1800RESPECT went unanswered last year. Ramping up awareness is a great move, but it’s already increased the pressure on the staff at 1800RESPECT and if that trend continues, which we obviously hope it does, the extra funding they’ve been given won’t be enough and thousands of women reaching out for help will go unheard.
The gender pay gap is increasing, not decreasing, we are becoming even more aware of the corresponding problem for women at retirement age when their superannuation is not enough to keep them above the poverty line.
Aboriginal women are 34 times more likely to be hospitalised by family violence than their non-Aboriginal peers, murdered Aboriginal women are not given enough public attention and the new funding does not do enough to address that.
Women with disabilities are half as likely to be in full time employment as men with disabilities, business needs to know what they can do to assist those women to find the work they can and want to do.
Women are increasingly refusing to silently accept these realities. We are not gratefully taking the small wins or the first steps as the best we can hope for; this is not being negative. It is, in fact, the opposite of negativity, it’s a strong and confident response that says we know we should have more, and we are willing and able to fight for it. More than that, the underlying belief is that if we keep fighting we will achieve the changes we know need to occur.
I don’t know how much further from negative you can really get than the belief that you can argue for change and achieve it.
Women’s Agenda is a site for career minded women, we publish many articles providing advice, guidance and inspiration for women with ambition, ability and drive. We’re proud of that and even more proud to be a resource for those women. And we also know that those women care passionately about the wellbeing of all women. They want to know what cultural and political roadblocks are holding women back from the success they undoubtedly have the ability to achieve. They want to understand the issues that damage women and what we can do to change them.
Again, this is the opposite of negative. It’s strength and positivity and confidence in our ability to change the world we live in and make it better for all women.
So the next person who tells me that women are being negative when they refuse to accept gender inequality in any form will elicit nothing more than laughter. And perhaps a suggestion that you should rethink your definition of negative, because what I think you’re actually saying is “why are you being so positive?”