JavaScript is disabled in your web browser or browser is too old to support JavaScript. Today almost all web pages contain JavaScript, a scripting programming language that runs on visitor's web browser. It makes web pages functional for specific purposes and if disabled for some reason, the content or the functionality of the web page can be limited or unavailable.

Monday, May 26, 2025

Equality of opportunity?

by

20120930

One qual­i­ty we all share as hu­mans is we are all dif­fer­ent from each oth­er. These dif­fer­ences shape us as in­di­vid­u­als and as mem­bers of groups. The an­thro­pol­o­gist Ruth Bene­dict once re­marked, "the pur­pose of an­thro­pol­o­gy is to make the world safe for hu­man dif­fer­ences." How we go about do­ing that is not a sim­ple task. One step is to en­sure that peo­ple aren't ex­clud­ed from equal­i­ty of op­por­tu­ni­ty-such as in em­ploy­ment-based on ar­bi­trary cul­tur­al and per­son­al dif­fer­ences.

Cul­tur­al dif­fer­ences are part of our ex­pres­sive be­hav­iour and iden­ti­ty. They in­clude a per­son's eth­nic­i­ty, their gen­der, re­li­gion and much else. Many na­tions have laws to try and en­sure em­ploy­ment dis­crim­i­na­tion based on dif­fer­ence doesn't oc­cur. Yet as some can at­test, hir­ing and fir­ing is of­ten based on sub­jec­tive de­ci­sion-mak­ing and per­ceived stereo­types about a per­son's abil­i­ties.

At this year's Ma­tric­u­la­tion cer­e­mo­ny at UWI, St Au­gus­tine Cam­pus, there was an in­ter­est­ing vi­su­al con­trast. In the front row, sat ahead of the new first year un­der­grads, were the top per­form­ers at this year's Sec­ondary En­trance As­sess­ment (SEA). Un­der­stand­ably they looked ner­vous as they wait­ed to be ho­n­oured. On the main stage were se­nior UWI of­fi­cials, there to wel­come the in­com­ing un­der­grad­u­ate class of 2015, as well as of­fer con­grats to the SEA's stars.

The con­trast wasn't be­tween those look­ing ner­vous and the more com­posed reg­u­lars at such cer­e­monies. Rather it was about gen­der. Of the SEA stu­dents sat in the front row 12 were girls and one boy. Of the 13 se­nior mem­bers of the UWI Ad­min­is­tra­tive and Aca­d­e­m­ic staff on stage ten were men and three women.

The vi­su­al con­trast is anec­do­tal. Yet when think­ing about equal­i­ty of op­por­tu­ni­ty based on gen­der it does prompt the thought-why if girls are mas­sive­ly out­per­form­ing boys at age 11 are there not more women rep­re­sent­ed on stage amongst the top tier of UWI of­fi­cials?

It is im­pos­si­ble to an­swer that ques­tion con­clu­sive­ly. The vari­ables are too many. Some claim a gen­der bias ex­ists in so­ci­ety. A struc­tur­al im­ped­i­ment like the prover­bial glass ceil­ing that pre­vents one group from reach­ing the top. Oth­ers sug­gest per­haps women make life choic­es that aren't con­ducive to se­nior po­si­tions.

An­oth­er way to look at the prob­lem has been to view it from the per­spec­tive of male un­der­achieve­ment in ed­u­ca­tion. A re­al­i­ty of­ten blamed on poor-par­ent­ing and school-teach­ing ex­pe­ri­ences that pro­duce an an­ti-ed­u­ca­tion male iden­ti­ty. How­ev­er, in the con­text of equal­i­ty of op­por­tu­ni­ty that view fails to ac­count for the dom­i­nance of men in lead­er­ship po­si­tions in lat­er life.

As any good re­searcher will tell you pin­point­ing why is al­ways hard be­cause cor­re­la­tion does not mean causal­i­ty. Re­al life is messy. But here is a take­away worth con­sid­er­ing. A re­cent study was con­duct­ed in­to gen­der bias in hir­ing for aca­d­e­m­ic jobs in the hard sci­ences.

It was a ran­domised con­trolled ex­per­i­ment where fac­ul­ty mem­bers-both men and women-were giv­en iden­ti­cal job ap­pli­ca­tion pack­ages and asked to eval­u­ate a can­di­date. The on­ly dif­fer­ence was that half the fac­ul­ty mem­bers were giv­en ap­pli­ca­tions with a man's name and the oth­er half were giv­en the same ap­pli­ca­tion but with a woman's name.

Across the board the "fe­male" ap­pli­cants were deemed to be less com­pe­tent, less em­ploy­able and less suit­able to be men­tored. They were al­so of­fered a low­er start­ing salary. What was most re­veal­ing was that the gen­der bias wasn't just on the part of men. It was equal­ly com­ing from fac­ul­ty mem­bers who were women too.

This sug­gests we aren't talk­ing about bla­tant sex­ism here but more sub­tle bi­as­es. These bi­as­es seem to have been ab­sorbed and are re­pro­duced by women them­selves. One way to de­scribe this is to say pa­tri­archy is com­mon­sen­si­cal and women can be in­volved in its main­te­nance and re­pro­duc­tion.

Per­haps in try­ing to adapt and sur­vive in the "man's world" of the hard sci­ences some have ab­sorbed cul­tur­al stereo­types and myths about women. These stereo­types and myths re­in­force each oth­er and be­come a fac­tor in the ex­clu­sion of suit­ably qual­i­fied women from hav­ing true equal­i­ty of op­por­tu­ni­ty in pur­su­ing par­tic­u­lar jobs.

Put most sim­ply this means that in our every­day lives many of us might be re­in­forc­ing through sub­tle, im­plic­it, as­sump­tions about each oth­er, the ex­clu­sion of one group over an­oth­er. And that's one way pow­er works. It is sub­con­scious. We can all get caught un­awares, re­pro­duc­ing so­ci­etal stereo­types about com­pe­ten­cy that re­in­force a sys­tem built to de­ny cer­tain peo­ple true equal­i­ty of op­por­tu­ni­ty.

• Dy­lan Ker­ri­g­an is an an­thro­pol­o­gist at UWI, St Au­gus­tine


Related articles

Sponsored

Weather

PORT OF SPAIN WEATHER

Sponsored