Carlos,
Your claims are questionable. A quick google search under the term "ratio
of female to male designers" surfaces these statistics:
"Despite the fact that women make up the majority of the gaming audience,
the number of women working in the games industry remains shockingly low-
only 12% of game designers in Britain and 3% of all programmers are women.
The number of women speaking at industry conferences and press events is
minuscule. And it isn't because women don't want to work in games"
(Jayanth, 2014)
"Demographically, designers are 60% male, 93% white and, on average, 38
years old. The survey compares these figures to architects, software
professionals and 'artists & literary professionals'. In gender terms,
design doesn't come off badly – 84% of architects and 86% of software
professionals are male. " (Burgoyne, 2010)
"Despite the fact that women control 80% of consumer spending, only 3% of
creative directors (and we're not talking about celebrity CDs
<http://www.fastcocreate.com/1682443/what-does-a-creative-director-do-exactly-and-is-justin-timberlake-qualified>)
are female." (Dishman, 2013)
"A much-quoted survey of the UK design industry published by the Design
Council in 2010 revealed that only 40% of designers were women, in
startling contrast to the 70% of female design students. " (Siddall, 2014)
"63% have suffered sexual discrimination (including inappropriate comments
or being treated differently because of gender) in their career. Most of
the discrimination happens on the construction site and not as much within
the architectural office." (Kim, 2012)
And a simple Google search using the term "women in academia" revealed:
*"* more women enter university than men
<http://www.ucas.com/data-analysis/data-resources/data-tables/sex>and there
is almost equal representation
<http://www.ecu.ac.uk/publications/files/equality-in-he-statistical-report-2013-staff.pdf/view>
of
women and men at lower professional levels, only 27.5% of senior managers
in higher education and 20.5% of professors in the UK are women. Worse,
only 1.1% of senior managers in higher education and 1.4% of professors in
the UK are black and minority ethnic women" (Black & Islam, 2014)
"“It was expected that male part-time instructors would move on to
something better and the women wouldn’t or they would be satisfied with
less,” Schell said. She says this fits into the idea of women earning
“psychic income” to make up for the lack monetary earnings." (Steiger, 2013)
"In 2009, the *Women in Science in Australia*
<http://scienceandtechnologyaustralia.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/2009report_wise.pdf>
report
showed that despite over half of the students studying science being
female, numbers drop sharply as they climb the career ladder. Typically, a
quarter of our junior independent researchers (senior lecturers or
assistant professors) are women but this plummets to 10–15% at the highest
academic level (professor). Interestingly, even though the starting numbers
vary for different scientific disciplines (e.g. engineering and mathematics
are male-dominated disciplines, even at the undergraduate level), this
compelling inverse relationship dominates across the board." (Evans-Galea &
Jones, 2014)
"The major finding was that while women as senior managers had an increased
capacity to impact on decision-making in managerial universities, mainly
related to ‘soft’ management skills, these were not valued in a competitive
management culture strongly focused on research output. Thus managerialism
presents a great challenge for women in senior management in higher
education." (White, Carvalho & Riordan, 2011)
"compared to men, women who pursue BAs in less math-intensive fields, such
as the life sciences, psychology, or the social sciences (LPS), are less
likely to earn PhDs or go on to assistant professorships with their PhDs,
instead choosing health and other people-related occupations. Moreover,
those who do enter academia are less likely to get tenure or get promoted
in both the life sciences and psychology." (Friday, 2015)
In my survey, design comes through as a very gender neutral activity (not
only regarding the demographics but also regarding the fact that there are
no significant differences of opinion or practices between genders).
I would be interested to see the method and results of your survey.
I for one don't buy into gender bias, be it for or against males or
females. Admittedly, in my country we don't have the "old boy network" of
anglo-saxon tradition, so that might be the reason why all these gender
issues seem so outlandish to me. We do suffer from an age-old gender bias
across all sectors of activity, don't get me wrong. But in design,
specifically, the tendency is actually towards female domination.
Female domination in undergraduate enrolment or in industry? As many of my
references have pointed out, females dominate the percentage of design
students but unfortunately this is not reflected in practice.
Just because you do not see this imbalance doesn't mean it does not exist.
Im surprised to read such loaded and subjective claims from a research
student.
Best,
-Stefanie
References:
Jayanth, M. (2014, September 19). 52% of gamers are women- but the industry
doesn’t know it. *The Guardian.* Retrieved from:
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/sep/18/52-percent-people-playing-games-women-industry-doesnt-know
Burgoyne, P. (2010, March 30). UK designers: white, (mostly) male, 38 and
multiplying [Web log post]. Retrieved from:
http://www.creativereview.co.uk/cr-blog/2010/march/uk-design-survey
Dishman, L. (2013, February 26). Where are all the women creative
directors? [Web log post]. Retrieved from:
http://www.fastcompany.com/3006255/where-are-all-women-creative-directors
Siddall, L. (2014, October 28). Rebecca Wright on the ration of girls with
design degrees vs. those in the industry. Retrieved from:
http://www.itsnicethat.com/articles/rebecca-wright
Kim, S. (2012, January 15). Why are only 20 percent of registered
architects women? Retrieved from:
http://www.zdnet.com/article/why-are-only-20-percent-of-registered-architects-women/
Black, C. & Islam, A. (2014, February 24) Women in academia: what does it
take to reach the top? *The Guardian*. [Web log post] Retrieved from:
http://www.theguardian.com/higher-education-network/blog/2014/feb/24/women-academia-promotion-cambridge
Steiger, K. (2013, July 11) The pink collar workforce of academia.
Retrieved from:
http://www.thenation.com/article/175214/academias-pink-collar-workforce
Evans-Galea, M. & Jones, O. (2014, August 15). Women in Science: Closing
the Gender Gap. [Web log post]. Retrieved from:
http://womeninscienceaust.org/2014/08/15/women-in-science-closing-the-gender-gap/
White, K., Carvalho, T. & Riordan, S. (2011). Gender, power and
managerialism in universities. J*ournal of Higher Education Policy and
Management.* 33(2), 179-188
Friday, L. (2015, March 2) A changing landscape for women in academic
science. Retrieved from:
http://www.bu.edu/today/2015/a-changing-landscape-for-women-in-academic-sciences/
On Sun, Jun 7, 2015 at 12:05 PM, Carlos Pires <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:
> Dear friends,
>
> There are two different issues I want to address in this post.
> The first regards the main subject of this thread.
> The second is regarding power relations and gender bias.
> I have been trying to adhere to the "2-post rule", but I will break it if
> necessary (sorry!).
>
> I will start with a checklist written in the form of advice to myself, and
> I thought it might be at least remotely interesting to someone else. That
> is my first and last tenet in my "posting rules": if I think that something
> is not in the least potentially interesting to a couple of people on this
> list, then I won't post it. If I think something is useful for just 1
> person, I will say it off-list to that person. Disclaimer: either way, I
> might be wrong.
> Again, this is advice to myself. Use it has you see fit.
>
> 1. Be careful what you call "ad hominem attacks".
> Sometimes, what might seem ad hominem is a proportionate and appropriate
> reply to a flawed argument from authority. If you find yourself as the
> target for what you deem as an ad hominem attack, then start by taking a
> step back and re-reading your posts. You probably had that coming. If not,
> by all means expose it in a thorough reply.
>
> 2. Mind the unquenchable thirst for manicheism.
> It's not only Paul Simon. We all think everything looks better in
> black&white dichotomies. We're hardwired that way. This handicap manifests
> itself in the way we write and in the way we read. We put absolutes in
> other people's words and on our own, without such absolutes actually being
> there. We validate flawed assumptions of our own by convincing ourselves
> that they are "implicit" in what the other has ommited. Regarding our own
> words, we assume that others can read our minds and accurately infer what
> we have ommited. So, never assume that you know what the other(s) ommitted,
> nor assume that others will be able to tell what you have omitted. I
> remember I have created some straw men out of this yearning for a clear,
> sharp contrast. And I am sorry for that.
>
> 3. Don't forget that on the other side of an argument there is a person
> whom you don't actually know.
> That person from whom you know just a few paragraphs of prose (probably
> hastily written, sometimes not in her mother tongue) has a whole universe
> of her own. Never assume others come from a context similar to yours. The
> difference in backgrounds can have deep consequences for any research
> discourse, such as the different etymologies of words used to convey
> pivotal concepts.
> So, allow some leeway in interpretation (Filippo Salustri has managed to
> actually make a very good example of how to do this, in a recent post; he
> calls that the "principle of charity" *). I have noticed that people in
> english-speaking countries tend to overlook this bias, as everybody speaks
> their language but they seldom are aware of the language the other party
> speaks. I have found this flaw multiple times in people from the USA, but
> nobody is exempt from it, and it doesn't necessarily relate to language
> (though semantical differences have a huge bearing on research). Western
> culture (and western science) is deeply biased against other
> ("non-western") cultures, as surely we are all aware of.
>
> 4. Get to the point. There are times when an issue recalls some episode
> from your life. If you can express yourself without boring people to death
> with snippets from your life, then by all means do it. If your point can be
> better communicated with an anecdote, then by all means do it. (My life is
> very boring, so I will make an effort to try the former).
>
> 5. Respect is good. Dedication is better. If you put some effort in trying
> to understand other people's messages and in trying to taylor your own
> messages to be (potentially) more easily understood by others, the exchange
> will be much better at every level, and everyone will benefit from it.
>
> 6. Respect also has levels. It is a sign of lack of respect to respond to
> a thorough and lengthy post with a snide remark or with a smart one-liner.
> I know I'm guilty of having done so.
>
> 7. It is also a blatant show of disrespect to close a thread by saying
> something along the lines of "well, now I'm having a cognac and a cigar on
> my front porch", or "now I'm walking the dog", or "now I'm doing the
> laundry", or "this list sucks", or whatever. This is dismissive and
> disrespectful. It shows you don't give a damned thing about the
> conversation but you actually went through the trouble of making sure
> everyone else notices your utter contempt for the subject and for the
> people debating it. If you don't care about the subject, just don't post.
> If you don't like the list, just unsubscribe.
> Anyway, you're not obliged to answer, and you surely don't need to make
> people notice that you loath them for being interested in a particular
> subject or for expressing an opinion. At the very least, if you really want
> to say something, say something useful like the reasons why you have "been
> there, done that", or whatever. Snide, dismissive remarks only make you
> look like a spoiled brat craving attention.
> If the impulse to shoot a snide remark is related to the fact that the
> target of your remark has previously showed you her contempt for your
> arguments, then a better way to go about it might be an off-list direct
> reply to that person.
>
> -------------
>
> A few notes on power relations and gender.
> This addresses you all.
>
> At present, I am not a professor nor have I any role in academia. I don't
> have any strings attached, so I am free to speak my mind at all times. I
> have even been allowed the luxury of stripping some wannabe emperors of
> their new academic clothes. In hindsight, it was almost suicidal, but
> fortunately it ended without drama (at least for now...). I don't expect to
> get a medal for that, and though I think I will not be "punished" for it, I
> couldn't care less. Well, actually I care, because I take care in having a
> clean conscience.
>
> I do understand people in academia have to play some power games.
> I couldn't care less about all that, and I pity anyone who cares.
> I'm doing this PhD because I chose so.
> I'm a member of the DRS because I chose so.
> I'm a subscriber of this list because I chose so.
> The only power relation between me and the list is that I am a subscriber,
> not an administrator.
> I don't have a "delete" button at my disposal.
> I think that's the only power relation there is to be had in here.
> All other power relations you might feel or imagine, you have brought them
> in yourselves.
>
> Having said that, I should also say that the only thing I do notice (and I
> already mentioned in my previous post) is that sometimes there is a hint of
> patronizing towards people who are identified as students (as opposed to
> people who are identified as PhD advisors — I'm not even talking about the
> people whom I had only previously known as names on the spines of a few
> books in my library). I have felt similar bias several times in my life
> from people who held academic degrees above mine and thought those degrees
> grant them some higher powers of prescience. I can recognize that sort of
> bias when I see it. And I have seen it here. But I also have seen admission
> to that (and other) bias and I think that when it happens, it is (most of
> the times) unwittingly — because people here, in general, tend to focus on
> the subject at hand.
>
> Regarding gender bias, I can't say I ever witnessed anything of the sort
> in here, except for the recent comments targeting "male" list members.
> Gender bias goes not both, but several ways. Please be mindful of that.
> In my personal experience as a professor, I have served under the
> directorship of women more than under the directorship of men. In
> approximately 20 years as a teacher, only a couple of those years I had a
> male director. There was no correlation whatsoever to how good or bad they
> performed and their gender.
>
> Another interesting datum is that in the survey I ran last year, turns out
> there was a 1.2:1 ratio of female:male designers. This ratio holds across
> the whole world, with the exception of the Indian sub-continent, where
> there were more males than females. The survey had a little over 500
> respondents from all continents (except Antarctica...)
> In my survey, design comes through as a very gender neutral activity (not
> only regarding the demographics but also regarding the fact that there are
> no significant differences of opinion or practices between genders).
>
> In this list, however, the business is not "design" but rather "design
> research", and I understand this might relate to contexts that I do not
> comprehend. But designers are the majority of design researchers, so that
> is up to us, designers. As much as it is up to us to exert the changes we
> want in the world we inhabit by the way we conduct ourselves. I for one
> don't buy into gender bias, be it for or against males or females.
> Admittedly, in my country we don't have the "old boy network" of
> anglo-saxon tradition, so that might be the reason why all these gender
> issues seem so outlandish to me. We do suffer from an age-old gender bias
> across all sectors of activity, don't get me wrong. But in design,
> specifically, the tendency is actually towards female domination.
>
> Nevertheless, the majority of the top participants in this list is male.
> So I guess it is only natural that the modes of conversation are gendered.
> I recently read an interesting article from a guy who decided to read only
> female authors for 1 year. I remember there was a clear distinction in
> content, regarding confrontation / violence in male authors. This is
> something that will obviously be a blind spot for male subscribers to this
> list.
> I would welcome constructive** criticism towards more productive modes of
> conversation, modes that don't rely so much on confrontation but more on
> relations / connections or whatever eludes my limited and biased
> understanding.
>
>
> Notes:
> * I find the word "charity" to be strongly biased towards some religious
> principles and practices I loath, so I avoid using this word.
> ** By "constructive" I mean comments that provide actionable insights. It
> is not enough to notice that the majority of posters to the list are males,
> or to notice that males' modes of interaction rely mainly on confrontation.
> We don't know better. Please help us. You can't? Then step aside and let
> others try.
>
>
> All the best,
>
> ==================================
> Carlos Pires
>
> [log in to unmask]
> [log in to unmask]
> -------------------------------------------------------------
> Design & New Media MFA // Communication Design PhD Student @ FBA-UL
>
> Check the project blog:
> http://thegolemproject.com
> >
> > -----------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]>
> Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design
> Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>
--
*Stefanie Di Russo*
PhD Student
Centre for Design Innovation
Faculty of Health, Arts and Design
Swinburne University
*linkedin: public *profile
<http://www.linkedin.com/pub/stefanie-di-russo/35/16/a84>
-----------------------------------------------------------------
PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]>
Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design
Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
