The invisible half
Hi there,
Imagine for a moment that your work had twice the impact. That your efforts would resonate with twice as many people. That when you unveil your final product, you’ll hear twice as often “This is fantastic!”
I’m not talking about a smart to-do list or some new form of software. I’m not talking about a lifehack for doing more work in less time. No, I’m talking about a topic that stopped me in my tracks when I read a book on it not long ago: How the world sees men and women.
Or rather, how the world sees men, while structurally ignoring the perspectives of women.
Is that a topic for this newsletter? I believe it is. Because the point that Caroline Criado Pérez makes in her book Invisible Women is this: There’s almost no product or service or organization or institution you can think of that’s set up with full equity for men and women. That means that while the things we’re working on may meet the needs of men, there’s a big chance we’re failing to meet the needs of half the population.
And that’s the main advice of the book: Work to make sure female perspectives are well represented. At the top of your organization and in your team. When deciding what to build and testing what you create. In the feedback you gather and the data you collect.
Here are just a few things from Criado Pérez’s book that were news to me:
In many cities, public transportation primarily consists of lines that connect residential areas with downtown and business districts. Like the spokes of a wheel. The reason? Men are often in charge of the design phase, and they take their own commute as the norm for travel. While women are often better served by also having lines connecting different residential areas, for instance, and other patterns.
Better legislation is in the works, but many drugs are not equally tested on men and women. Yet some medicines have different effects—even opposite effects—depending on the sex of the patient. Plus: because menstrual cycles are somehow seen as “complex,” data related to them is often not collected at all, or drugs are exclusively tested in one particular phase of women’s cycles. But of course people may need medication at any time in their cycle.
For decades, automobiles have been subjected to safety tests using standard crash test dummies, which—you guessed it—approximate a typical male form and weight. Car companies today are starting to use female crash test dummies, but then often only in the passenger (!) seat. Tests reveal great variation in vehicle safety, depending on the different physical characteristics of the people involved.
Another car-related example: seatbelts with a shoulder strap are uncomfortable for many women. Instead of doing something to change the safety device, we just all seem to accept that this is the case, and some women resort to wearing their seatbelt incorrectly.Another safety issue: loads of products are designed for a user the size of the average man. That makes getting a good grip on wrenches, power drills, and even weapons in the military more difficult for anyone who doesn’t fit that norm. Poorly-fitting protective clothing compounds the danger.
Cleaning products and cosmetics often contain toxic substances. The reason that’s allowed? They’re under allowable limits. But these limits are set based on the effects of short-term exposure for the average person (read: man). Frequent use plus a different body weight and type are guaranteed to add up to different effects.
The book is an endless list of cases. Perhaps you’re fully aware of such issues, but I had my blind spots. I mean I knew things were unfair, but I had no clue that the problem was this vast and widespread, touching just about every aspect of our lives.
And I haven’t even talked about the larger themes of the book: income inequality and how women often shoulder a larger share of unpaid work in the home and community. A real eye-opener.
Speaking of income inequality, did you see the Gender Pay Gap Bot last week on Twitter? A UK couple built it for International Women’s Day. Whenever an organization tweeted out company PR celebrating women, the Pay Gap Bot would tweet out the actual pay discrepancy between male and female employees.
Making stuff that’s truly a good fit
There’s also an opportunity here. Because like I said at the start, 50% of us are continually running up against things big and small, like the examples above.
If you manage to make stuff that’s truly a good fit, you’ve got something that sets you apart. That, too, is working smart. That’s why I wanted to shine a light on this topic today.
I hope that my shock and unawareness are the exception, and that you’re all going to show me that’s indeed the case. The data, however, seems to indicate that a larger group shares these blind spots. So ask yourself this week:
How can I ensure that the perspectives of (other) women get equal treatment in my work and my life?
Have a good week,
Rick
PS For all the new Dutch subscribers, welcome! Here’s a related clip just for you from last week’s AvondShow with Arjen Lubach, where Janine Abbring fills in the host on all the infuriating ways it’s a man’s world.
produced by the language girl