On Coming Out as Trans In Class — The Elephant in the Room

Check out this recent column in the Chronicle of Higher Education by philosopher Rachel McKinnon, who writes about her decision to (and experience of) coming out as trans to her students. McKinnon writes that she came out, not only because her appearance would otherwise have been “the elephant in the room” but also because it’s important for students to see successful trans professionals. The column also has some important lessons about cultivating safe spaces for LGBTQ people, and other visible minorities.

Excerpt:

I write this account because I think that it contains some broader lessons for the academic community. First, my experience highlights how important a culture of respect and support, especially from your department, is for a gender transition. The institutional support of my department chair has been exemplary. But that should be the case for all sorts of minorities, whether part of the LGBT spectrum or members of racial, political, or any other minority group who may experience resistance to their self-expression. It’s imperative for colleges and universities to construct robust and explicit antidiscrimination and equity policies. The presence of those policies influences how free people feel to express themselves: A university with good protections for trans people, for example, makes it more likely that someone will be comfortable transitioning. That certainly factored into my decision.

Why Women Still Can’t Have It All

Really interesting article in this month’s Atlantic magazine by Anne-Marie Slaughter. I look forward to hearing our readers’ thoughts. Here’s a quick excerpt:

Women of my generation have clung to the feminist credo we were raised with, even as our ranks have been steadily thinned by unresolvable tensions between family and career, because we are determined not to drop the flag for the next generation. But when many members of the younger generation have stopped listening, on the grounds that glibly repeating “you can have it all” is simply airbrushing reality, it is time to talk.

I still strongly believe that women can “have it all” (and that men can too). I believe that we can “have it all at the same time.” But not today, not with the way America’s economy and society are currently structured. My experiences over the past three years have forced me to confront a number of uncomfortable facts that need to be widely acknowledged—and quickly changed.

An immigrant in limbo between two Americas

“Maria Gomez, a UCLA graduate with a master’s in architecture, grew up believing in the American Dream while living in its shadows as an illegal immigrant.”

–

An immigrant in limbo between two Americas, by Christopher Goffard, Los Angeles Times (June 8, 2012)

–

Click here for this important, timely, moving story…

–

… makes me think of my grandparents migration, my parents work, and how my situation(s) in the world relates to the situations of others… What do readers think of Maria Gomez? Does this story about her relate in any particular ways to your views of certain stereotypes or your moral judgments about immigration?

–

Groningen University reprimanded for appointing female professors

Groningen University (RUG) has a pretty good policy to improve the gender balance with full professors, which is generally embarassingly poor in the Netherlands.

However, the Committee for Equal Treatment received complaints from the Groningen student union that RUG has been discriminating men with the appointment of 12 full professors in 2010 and 2011. RUG created the posts especially for women assistant professors and men weren’t allowed to compete. This is against the law. The reason the student union filed the complaint is that, although they appreciate the efforts of RUG to improve the gender balance, more should be done about structural measures to improve the position of women professors instead, like making it easier to work part time.

The 12 women professors in question will not be required to relinquish their positions.

So technically, the reprimand was for discrimination, not for appointing women professors, but some reports in the media originally seemed to indicate that, hence this headline.

 

For the first time, women share the first kiss at a navy homecoming.

“It’s a time-honored tradition at Navy homecomings — one lucky sailor is chosen to be first off the ship for the long-awaited kiss with a loved one. Today, for the first time [according to the Navy], the happily reunited couple was gay.”

Here’s the full story.

Thanks @amelapay for sharing!

Some progress on the PLC board gender gap

At present, women occupy 14.2% of boardroom seats at FTSE 100 companies. There’s a clear consensus opinion among influential bodies that this percentage should increase. The CBI agrees, for example, and so does David Cameron. But both also cleave to the opinion that the imposition of mandatory quotas is not the best way to achieve this. Lord Davies’ report into the issue concurred with both opinions. In February, he proposed that FTSE 100 companies should aim for a target of 25% by 2015, that FTSE 350 companies should set their own goals, that all companies should set out how they intend to achieve their targets, and that shareholders should encourage companies in their endeavours.

There’s often good reason to be sceptical that large companies will make much effort to address such issues without at least the threat of legislative coercion. Such scepticism may have been encouraged when it emerged that only 33% of FTSE 100 companies had complied with Davies’ suggested August deadline for the formulation of policies designed to close their boardroom gender gaps.

However, the Davies report collated a significant amount of research suggesting that companies that narrow this gender gap improve their performance in a number of ways: they access a wider talent pool, their responsiveness to markets is better, their corporate governance improves, and most importantly, their stock market and sales performances improve. Accordingly, major investors have started to take notice, and to pressure companies to take seriously the issue of their boards’ gender balance. In a significant development, Legal and General, an enormous investor in major British companies, has started consistently raising the issue in meetings with the companies in which it has large stakes. It seems that the 250 companies have in the main responded positively, and undertaken to address the matter (as you probably should if one of your most important shareholders tells you to).

It remains to be seen whether this approach will actually deliver much change, and how quickly. Norway introduced a mandatory(and some argue 40% quota in 2003, when representation was 7%, and by the 2008 transition deadline 36% of PLC board seats were filled by women. Such rapid progress seems unlikely to be replicated in the UK without legislation.  Nevertheless, it’s somewhat heartening to see that some progress is being made through shareholder pressure, particularly since it’s most unlikely that legislative pressure will be forthcoming.

Here’s a link to a pdf of the Davies report; the section collating the research mentioned is on pp. 7-10.

The European Professional Women’s Network has a useful stock of reports, research, and articles on boardroom gender gaps here.

How to get more women professors: report from the the University of Tromsø

Curt Rice, the Pro Rector (Vice President) for Research & Development (prorektor for forskning og utvikling) at the University of Tromsø, explains how their efforts to get more women professors is paying off, yet more still needs to be done.

We have acknowledged that structural impediments are part of the reason that fewer women than men reach the rank of full professor. As a consequence, we work to reduce the impact of those impediments with women who are currently in the system, and we work to change the system so that the impediments will be eliminated for future generations.

and

It is possible to create a more fair system. Change can be achieved. With focus and commitment, universities can become better workplaces — workplaces with higher qualifications and with the conditions necessary to accomplish even more.

Good going.

Thanks, @christianmunthe

High Pay too High – findings of UK High Pay Commission

The High Pay Commission is an independent body set up to investigate high pay in the UK. A year long investigation culminated in the publication of a report on Monday. Those who’ve been keeping an eye on the recession will be wholly unsurprised to learn that the poorer members of society are bearing the costs of austerity cuts, whilst the top 0.1% of earners are getting richer. The Commission states that:

In 1980 top bosses were well rewarded, but they had not pulled so far away from the rest of society. Since then some of them have enjoyed an increase of over 4000% to what are now multi-million pound packages… so much wealth has been channelled to those at the very top. This is a trend that has led to such a huge rise in inequality over the period that Britain now has a gap between rich and poor that rivals that in some developing nations.

Amongst the figures quoted by the Commission, is the salary of the chief executive at Lloyds Bank (now partly owned by the State), which the Commission states has increased by more than 3,000% since 1980 to more than £2.5m – 75 times the average Lloyds employee’s salary. In 1980, it was just (‘just’ – hah!) 13.6 times the average. Lloyds have responded with the claim that “The High Pay Commission’s figures are flawed. They have compared the average basic salary of our employees to a remuneration package awarded to the CEO that includes salary, bonus and benefits. As a result they have reached an inflated number that is entirely unrepresentative of the truth” – because everyone knows that bonuses and benefits aren’t really part of one’s salary, just little treats left by the banking fairy.

A copy of the High Pay Commission’s report, including recommendations such as not-doing-salary-deals-in-secret, can be downloaded from here.

Cooking on open fires killing women and children

“Two new studies led by University of California, Berkeley, researchers spotlight the human health effects of exposure to smoke from open fires and dirty cookstoves, the primary source of cooking and heating for 43 percent, or some 3 billion members, of the world’s population. Women and young children in poverty are particularly vulnerable.“

The researchers go to say that the studies provide compelling evidence that reducing household woodsmoke exposure is a public health intervention that is likely on a par with vaccinations and nutrition supplements for reducing severe pneumonia, and is worth investing in.

Read more here.

Thanks CO.

How many slaves work for you?

Find out here what your slavery footprint is.

What you do is answer the questions about the foods you eat, the clothes you wear, the kind of house you have, the stuff you own etc, and based on reports from various organisations and an algorithms for the score of a large number of products and product groups, you get an estimate.

They define slavery as follows:

Anyone who is forced to work without pay, being economically exploited, and is unable to walk away. Note: Forced Labor, also known as involuntary servitude, may result when unscrupulous employers exploit workers made more vulnerable by high rates of unemployment, poverty, crime, discrimination, corruption, political conflict, or cultural acceptance of the practice. Immigrants are particularly vulnerable, but individuals also may be forced into labor in their own countries. Female victims of forced or bonded labor, especially women and girls in domestic servitude, are often sexually exploited as well.

They provide tips on how to diminish your slavery footprint, too. A very good initiative, I think!

You can follow Slavery Footprint on twitter here.

Via Adinda Akkermans @nrcnext