This is the link to our audio:
http://otter.ai/u/QL-WuxjR-EkjP8RpuQGOaDvgH0k
Below is our transcript:
“Yo Is This…” TRANSCRIPT
Rafaela da Costa: Welcome back to another week of “Yo, Is This…”. This week we’re gonna be talking about sexism. My name’s Raf and I’m here with two of my peers.
Jerry Liu: Hi, I’m Jerry.
Rafaela da Costa: So, this week we’re going to be focusing on sexism in the workplace and industries. I’m personally going to focus a little bit more on fashion; just because it’s one of my interests, and my major. Starting off, we’re going to be talking about some CEOs. It’s no accident that the top 10 richest people are all men and two of those are CEOs of large fashion brands. Bernard Arnault, chairman and CEO of LVMH, which is Louis Vuitton, Hermés, and a couple other brands. Which is the largest luxury company is worth $110 billion dollars. And Amancio Ortega, the co-founder of the Inditex group, who owns Zara and Mango, and a couple other brands is worth $72 – $74.2 billion. Women hold currently only 4% of CEO positions at S&P companies, a big conglomerate with companies like Abbott, Amazon, Tesla, and 3m. In fact, there are more CEOs named John than there are female CEOs combined.
Karalyn Volant: To add to that, I’d also like to note that it also seems like, at least with the cases that I’ve seen, that the more money the company has the more freedom it has to hide or distract from their sexist systemic injustice. You listed several companies, fashion companies I’m not totally aware of, but Amazon was one. I would also like to add that all of these companies, to my knowledge, are very large because with enough money they don’t have to deal with very many consequences. Even through looking at a company like Google, last year they paid $310 million dollars in a settlement for sexual harassment cases. And perhaps that not specifically hiring, but just as a general look, this goes to show that the more the company has the more likely they’ll perform discriminatory acts against women or even many minority groups.
Jerry Liu: Okay, talking about gender discrimination. We could find that gender discrimination can appear as early as the moment that women decide to apply for a job. According to the research published by PNAS journal, both male and female recruiters are twice as likely to hire men than women. They also found that communicating expected performance boosted male candidates’ chances of being hired to 92%, and barely had any effects on those female candidates. When employers in the experiment were presented with examples of actual performance, women’s chances went up to, like 43%. Which is still over 20% lower than the probability of a man being hired. This allows us a perspective of, like a sketch of, how severe sexism is in the hiring process.
Rafaela da Costa: That also goes along with a couple of my points. I found a survey that said that 28% of models said they felt like they had to sleep with someone at work to get ahead. Like you said that with sexism in the workplace, this statistic didn’t mention if it was men or women, but I think as a society we can almost predict, or just come to the conclusion, that a majority of those models were probably women. Model agencies also insist on starvation diets and 18-hour work weeks for all of their models, and they end up taking 45% of the cut. So, even with the hard working conditions they have to go through and feeling like they have to sleep with people to get ahead they still end up losing about 50% of their cut, just in the modeling industry.
Karalyn Volant: Directly from what you were saying, in my research for a lot of companies there was one in particular, Activison, that was especially, that especially had systemic injustice against female employees. This was only brought to attention after a very tragic event. And not to take away not to take away from that tragedy, but it did give rise to many women describing, publicly, their experiences with the company in an effort to create awareness, and likely to help against the current lawsuit that is now against Activision. These described experiences mainly consisted of sexual harassment and it’s clear, especially by the exceptionally large amount of women who spoke on the matter, that these women spent so long adhering to what these men wanted them to do or forced them to do. That includes trying to progress with their jobs where they felt like they had to commit certain acts; like sleeping with their employers, sitting through very explicit and sexist comments, or even something like giving them inappropriate photos.
Jerry Liu: This actually reminds me of a research done by a sociology professor at UCLA. In her study, Professor Quadlin found that even though male and female job applicants have relatively the same callback rate, employers would be more likely to hire male job applicants with A or A+ GPA, but more likely to hire more female job applicants with a medium GPA, let’s say around B or B+. When employers hire people, they usually attribute male applicants’ high GPA to higher competence and smartness while attributing female applicants to high GPA or hardworking. This might not seem like a big problem because women are easier to be employed, according to the data. However, this kind of punishment for high achievement women caused by gender bias functions as a block to hinder high achievement women’s way of entering into the industry and getting access to a higher position, and therefore leaving them less choices in their career.
Rafaela da Costa: So yeah, going off of what you said versus men getting attributed to being smart for their good grades versus women being hardworking. I think it’s important to note that around 40-60 million people in the textile work industry, a majority are women, and the vast majority of those that make the womens, that make the world’s clothes, are women. They end up earning less than men and approximately 18% less. And they also rarely move out of entry level positions whereas male workers rise up to higher positions more easily. And then that kind of goes along with what you said, for the work versus smartness, women are just seen as, for getting good grades because they’re working harder and the jobs that they do it should just be hard work and not level of intelligence. Whereas higher up positions are for people of more intelligence which is attributed to men. I’d also like to note that women spend three times more on modeling and clothes than men yet a mere 14% of major brands are run by female designers despite the fact that a majority of the fashion design graduates are women and over 85% of the workforce in that industry is female.
Karalyn Volant: Yeah, Almost directly in contrast to that, or at least your first point, with women spending more or using these products more than men. Back in the Activision case, Activision is a gaming industry, or is within the gaming industry, or at least a very large contributor. And the majority of that community, statistically 60% of that community, is male dominated. So, I think in accordance with what you were saying; is that it doesn’t really matter if the industry is more female dominated or male dominated because either way, inside the companies men hold a position of power that causes women to be subjected to this kind of systemic injustice. And this may be partially unrelated, definitely still applying to systemic injustice, but I recently read a comment where someone stated that they would no longer be playing Activision games because they didn’t want to support the behaviors of men or treatment of women in their company; like many income discrepancies where women are paid drastically less than their male counterparts, or, even with the exact same work, and men getting more promotions overall. And this comment was intriguing because obviously it’s a large enough company where only a few people are actually going to stop playing the games. I mean, even on a lighter note, my own mother still plays World of Warcraft religiously. But, anyways, I did think of this in the fashion industry as well where, like you discussed previously, the money that the consumers are spending are only supporting a majority of men, and not so much women. So, I have to ask what your guys’ thoughts are. Do either of you think that it would help or be beneficial in any way for people to stop spending money in support of these treatments. Almost like a boycott. Not that it’s realistically possible, but hypothetically do you think that would be a way to change?
Rafaela da Costa: Personally, I think that for certain companies, like you mentioned before with all the lawsuits with that one certain company. I think that if there’s certain companies or things that are obviously treating women as less than men or have sexism or systemic injustices, like we’ve talked about. I think that boycotting those types of businesses could eventually help. Especially, if it’s one person in charge that’s making sexist comments, or somebody that’s more against hirings women or keeping women in lower positions. Just like, to bring it back to fashion, I learned a lot about sustainability and companies that are thinking about the environment versus companies that are contributing to the waste on our planet. So, I think there are a lot of people that see companies that are hurting the environment and choose to boycott them, and it does end up opening the eyes of that company; the more and more people that decide to boycott it.
Jerry Liu: I have nothing to add, but let’s look back to the sexism one. We should note that sexism in career may not be very obvious nowadays. So, we might need to be very careful in our careers. Like in your life we could find that even though employment discrimination based on sex is banned, that doesn’t mean it was eliminated. Those employers would reveal their discrimination more explicitly. For example, some managers have been trained to make decisions based on what the woman was wearing and whether her handshake is firm or gentle. Sounds ridiculous doesn’t it? But that’s true.
Karalyn Volant: Yeah, your statement that managers make decisions based on a handshake or an outfit is very interesting to me. Before we mentioned that women had to partake in extremely degrading acts or treatments to move up in their jobs, but it’s surprising to me that they also have to make such small, specific accommodations that otherwise wouldn’t have even been a concern for a man. It seems like women have to constantly show a more decisive or aggressive approach to everything, as if they have to prove themselves.
Rafaela da Costa: This kind of goes off of what you guys are talking about. This is just another thing I kind of want to add. I think a lot of people justify women not being in positions of power just because women are put in a position much like a maternal point of view. So, having children and stuff like that ends up derailing their careers and ends up leaving them in lower positions. While men don’t necessarily have to take time off to do that and can continue to move up in the workforce. I just think that the whole idea is kind of messed up because I read in some of my research, I found only 45% of women reported that their companies had paid maternity leave and 24% said that they had worked flexibility programs. I think that’s obviously really important to help women out with those programs just because, obviously, women are going to have babies because that’s the only way that babies are made. So, justifying that women are in lower positions just because of that doesn’t really make sense to me. I think companies need to work better at either finding ways for women’s maternity leave to work better with their work and for them not to lose their positions when doing so.
Jerry Liu: Okay, so talking about the current situation that women are facing I have questions for you guys like what factors do you think may contribute to sexism in the employment process, like what theories that we’ve learned could explain it? As for me, personally, I think the causation of the employment discrimination based on sex was caused by stereotypes from male dominate society. We could understand the issue from the perspectives we have learned. First, everyone wants to gain recognition from others, like the One and Other theory. So, we can imagine the male group as a whole. The male group desperately wishes to gain recognition and supremacy from the females therefore they tend to exclude women from the competition. Another theory that might be responsible for sexism in the employment process could be “the one and other” theory as I talked about. There were more differences that contributed to the distinction between “one” and “other”, and in this case, the difference could be gender. Once females are recognized as the “other”, they would be excluded from the dominant “one”, which is the male group. Do you guys have anything to add about it?
Karalyn Volant: In reference to what you said about everyone wanting to gain, or men specifically wanting to gain recognition. I do agree, in a lot of ways, but I think that it’s more just simply a very, men having a very outdated approach to what society determined as a way for them to act versus a way for women to act. Where for so long women were treated as less than men and now that that’s changing men want to preserve their previous place in society. And to this I would also reference another theory we learned in class, the subaltern theory. At least, in addition to the Other/One theory that you talked about. Where these outdated thoughts and treatments are still happening because women don’t have enough of a voice to speak for themselves in opposition to their treatment in the workplace. There have been many similar cases in the workplace that I’ve seen where women would say that they had an idea, and the men would disagree with their idea but then later come up with the same idea as if the women didn’t already mention it. Which, you know, is a very simple predicament but it’s so insanely prevalent. There’s just a constant stream of being ignored and being treated unfairly, and regardless of how many women come forward they never seem to be heard; there’s always just another case of the same thing happening over and over again.
Rafaela da Costa: I definitely agree with both of you guys’ points. I think, Karalyn, you mentioned that like, yeah men mostly just have been stuck in this position of power for so long, and I think that’s very true. We’ve just always, even bringing it back to the beginning of time, there were hunters and gatherers, and men were seen as stronger and more powerful and the leaders of the family and things like that. And I think that whole idea has just been stuck with our society; for, I mean, since the beginning. And as we know women didn’t get the right to vote until only like 100 years ago, which sounds crazy, but it was in the 1920s. And just like we see throughout history, women have always been suppressed more than men, and I think tying it back to our class. I definitely agree with you Jerry with women being the other in society, and I think that for our reading in Things Fall Apart, I think we saw that one with the whole family, like the tribe; the women were seen as weaker and feminism, or being feminine, was, I think his name was Okonkwo, he saw that as being weak and he associated being feminine being weak. And I think those are the kinds of ideals that have been ingrained in our society. And they’re finally starting to change now, and I think men are just having some problems letting go of their position of power.
Jerry Liu: So, for me, personally, I wanted to hear about some of the advice from you guys. Here I’ll talk about my advice for females and then maybe you guys could add yours based on it. Like, first, I personally think the most important character among all is female employees themselves. First and foremost, women could be more confident when they face some chances. Did you know that male applicants usually apply for a job when they fit only like 60 or 70% of requirements while female applicants usually apply for a job only when they are fully prepared. Different from male applicants, female applicants tend to follow rules strictly which may cause them to view job qualifications as some kinds of actual requirements. Again, if female applicants could only accept a chance when they are fully prepared, they might lose a lot of chances in their career. In addition, I think female applicants should continue to stand up for their rights; both within jobs or outside of their careers. Once they find they are unequally treated, for example some employers reject their job application for some sexism reasons, they need to fight against it bravely. Additionally, they should know that if victims retreated, their voices would never be heard.
Karalyn Volant: With what you were saying about confidence, I do believe that confidence goes a long way. It seems like the employment industry, and perhaps it’s useful to reference what we learned about in class, specifically Adichie’s single story theory, where in this industry employers are looking for more than what’s given. It’s never enough because everything necessary isn’t always included. However, I do think the reason for this is because when you go so long being oppressed and voiceless it’s difficult to think or show your true worth. Outside of this class, there is a theory in psychology called the illusory truth effect which basically states that when you’re told something enough you start to believe it. I’d also like to note, on the other side of this, that, where women are discriminated against just simply based on sexism, and not their lack of showing confidence. I honestly don’t know what could change for that. I’d like to think maybe time, but regardless I don’t think that’s something that can change with just confidence. I can’t count the amount of times I’ve seen or heard of an incredibly confident woman, gay man, African American, Asian American, or really anyone that’s not your typical American white male receive completely fair treatment. I think that in those situations the only thing that can be done is to continue to create awareness and, as crass as it sounds, hope for the best.
Rafaela da Costa: Yeah, for sure. Both of you guys bring up a lot of good points, I think that, I mean you guys touched on it, but I think that the efforts to change our society today are both in the hands of women, but also just because a woman decides to be more confident and has more education or anything like that doesn’t mean that the stereotypes and the injustices embedded in our society will go away. I think that society needs to start treating men and women as equals and not, like I mentioned before a little bit, but with the whole maternity leave. I think that ends up derailing a lot of careers like you mentioned your mom Karalyn but, I know that after my mom had children her career kind of went downhill a little bit, but I think that if society understands that women will need to take time off to do things like that then helping them to come back to their place of work and not falling behind then I think that stuff like that will just empower women to feel more confident in the workplace. I also think that holding people accountable that are being sexist in the workplace or not treating people fairly regardless of, whether it be with women, or like you said with race and stuff like that, I think that those people are just stuck in the past and as a whole society we need to move forward and change. And I think that people that are resistant to that change are kind of falling behind and shouldn’t be in these positions of power, regardless of how qualified and how long they’ve been there. But yeah basically I agree with both of you, what you guys said. Really good points. I think this is a good place to wrap up our podcast unless anybody else has anything else they want to add.
Karalyn Volant: Nope.
Rafaela da Costa: Okay, well great podcast guys.