Dear Sam,
Thanks for your reply. Three quick thoughts --
(1)
There are biological differences between women and men. As I stated,
most differences are cultural, not biological, and culture governs
the expression of biological difference. Nevertheless, physical
differences may indeed shape some capacities. What we often cannot
say with certainty is what those capacities are.
(2)
We have nearly 10,000 years of recorded human history behind us. Most
of this has been male dominated. With less than half a century of
major social change toward equality in the professions, it is
difficult to predict the future of women in the professions. It seems
to me that we need more time before we make sweeping predictions that
women will not achieve equality in the professions.
One reason that we do not yet see a 50/50 proportion of women at the
upper reaches of the different professions is that we still don't
have large enough cohorts of women with equal experience to similar
male cohorts. Law is a good example. The first cohort of women
graduates left Harvard Law School in 1953. There were only 13 in that
group. It was fifty years before Harvard Law got is first female
dean. It has been in this time that entering cohorts finally attained
equality between men and women -- 51% at University of California in
1997, roughly 50% at Harvard in 2003, and so on.
In 1960, fewer that 2% of all graduates in the six professions of
medicine, veterinary medicine, dentistry, law, engineering, and
architecture. Since senior cohorts take a quarter century or more to
emerge, women have been reaching the senior levels of their
professions in rough equivalence to their proportion in graduating
entry cohorts. It is true that we do not yet see 50/50 equality in
the upper reaches of the professions, but this can easily be
explained by the size of cohorts. Something similar happens in the
cohorts of MBA graduates on which business career paths leading to
CEO populations have been based. It is true that women continue to
have a more difficult time than men for several reasons, but we will
not see the 50/50 graduate cohorts reach the senior level for at
least two decades. It is too early to predict what will or will not
happen then -- in design or any other profession.
(3)
The work and family roles that women occupy tend to be undervalued.
This is exactly the point made by many Scandinavian feminists. This,
too, may change as societies change in response to the larger range
of issues. It is also the case that many men are responding in new
ways to the need for different kinds of change.
Yours,
Ken
--
Sam Ladner wrote:
(1)
>The notion that men and women have "different hormones" really is
>irrelevant here. Men's and women's hormonal structure has been shown
>to affect a very narrow portion of human behavior, specifically
>relating to aggression. See Armstrong and Armstrong, The Double
>Ghetto for a very nice critique of supposed anatomical differences
>that are actually constructed out of gendered assumptions.
(2)
>We will likely NOT see a 50/50 ratio of credentialed designers, just
>as we do not see a 50/50 ratio of law firm partners, CEOs,
>engineers, computer scientists, surgeons, or airline pilots despite
>many years of women entering these fields. The issue isn't that we
>don't have enough women with sufficient experience in the field yet,
>and just given time, we will have them.
(3)
>No the issue is the systematic undervaluing of life concerns that
>typically fall under women's responsibility. That is to say women's
>domestic labour and social labour prevents them from reaping the
>full benefit of their professional experience.
--
Ken Friedman
Professor
Dean, Swinburne Design
Swinburne University of Technology
Melbourne, Australia
|
