Joan Burton's cabinet post (victim of sexism or not?)

electrictrad

Lyanna wrote: »

As for your point about engineers, everyone has some effect on society but I don't think theirs is at the level of politicians and teachers

Being from a maths-orientated background, I am bound to be a little biased, but all the technological advances of the past 3,000 years were driven by the ingenuity of the engineering community. . .from paper, to machines, to that wonderful device you are using to post messages to all parts of the globe. . .the engineer drives positive change and development in this world much better than any politician. . .

Again, you make a good point, but the circumstances are much different in Ireland now than in the past, and much different than other countries. . .I believe it's far better for these imbalances to balance themselves out naturally when required, that way you don't inhibit anyone from making a real difference in an area where they are most suited to. . .politics in different places changes naturally to suit it's society. . .

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Centaur

electrictrad wrote: »

Being from a maths-orientated background, I am bound to be a little biased, but all the technological advances of the past 3,000 years were driven by the ingenuity of the engineering community. . .from paper, to machines, to that wonderful device you are using to post messages to all parts of the globe. . .the engineer drives positive change and development in this world much better than any politician. . .

Not just positive. Technology has seen huge advances in weaponry and the development of the ultimate destruction device, the atomic bomb. Politicians decide how technology is utilised and distributed.

electrictrad wrote: »

Again, you make a good point, but the circumstances are much different in Ireland now than in the past, and much different than other countries. . .I believe it's far better for these imbalances to balance themselves out naturally when required, that way you don't inhibit anyone from making a real difference in an area where they are most suited to. . .politics in different places changes naturally to suit it's society. . .

I don't think women getting the vote could be described as a natural occurrence. They had to fight for it. If 10% representation in the national parliament after 90 years is progress then it is glacial.

steelcityblues

Penrose sounds like a nasty, arrogant so-and-so.

Gilmore should have told him that he could leave the Labour Party if he didn't accept his junior position, or along those lines!

Will be interesting to hear the Burton interview on the radio.

CDfm

I started the thread and I am still none the wiser.

Theories and statistics are all very fine but are they relevant in this situation.

Firstly, her qiualifications , B.COMM FCA and being a lecturer in accountancy at DIT are not impressive qualifications but they are good. She was not head of Department at a Prestigious University and as far as I know has not published anything academically

I looked up some accountancy jobs to see what jobs she may have done or have been on the way to

Audit Senior Mananger Big 4 Practice


Ref: : CSASM (Executive Connections Limited)
Location: : Dublin City Centre - Central Dublin
Rate: € 42 to € 50 K (Permanent)

http://www.accountantjobs.ie/accountant-job-Audit-Senior-Mananger-Big-4-Practice-16052

or this

Senior Financial Controller - EMEA

• Permanent
• 897409
• €101,000 - €110,000
• Thursday 3rd, February 2011

http://www.morganmckinley.ie/job/897409/senior-financial-controller-emea

Like it or not Burtons qualifications are not exceptional - she is an accountant ffs. Minister of State twice.

Brendan Howlin by comparison was a Primary School Teacher & Minister for Health in the Rainbow Co-alition, Environment Minister, Leas Ceann Comhairle and has leadership ambitions . He is from a Labour/ITGWU family in Wexford and was even named after Brendan Corish -ex Labour leader. Has been a TD for ever.

On paper if you wanted a link man with your coallition partners or the Unions - Howlin is your man.

Susan McKay of the National Womens Council has perjorativelly called him a "safe pair of balls".NWC is a powerful lobby group.

If Eamonn Gilmore got knocked down by a young FG TD while being interviewed outside Leinster House any leadership battle in Labour would include those two.

So for my money there is a battle being played out here.

Howlin won it.

So in the context of who had the best skills politically hands down Howlin pips her.

Was it sexist - I am not so sure.

Did she hit a "glass celing" - no -she is in the Cabinet.

In Labour constituent affiliated organisations I am not so sure.

Does Labour have an old boys network or is there some sort of ideological debate between party wings that I am missing,.

Macha

[Jackass] wrote: »

If Eamonn Gilmore got knocked down by a young FG TD while being interviewed outside Leinster House any leadership battle in Labour would include those two.

So for my money there is a battle being played out here.

Howlin won it.

So in the context of who had the best skills politically hands down Howlin pips her.

Was it sexist - I am not so sure.

Did she hit a "glass celing" - no -she is in the Cabinet.

In Labour constituent affiliated organisations I am not so sure.

Does Labour have an old boys network or is there some sort of ideological debate between party wings that I am missing,.

I think this is exactly right. There's all sorts of internal wheeling and dealing that goes on with these positions, both within Labour and with their coalition partners. Howlin is a pro negotiator, while Joan can be lacking in that area.

Nothing to do with gender, in my opinion. The optics are bad but then, I think we've spent too much time worrying about optics in Irish politics.

gizmo555

steelcityblues wrote: »

Penrose sounds like a nasty, arrogant so-and-so.

Gilmore should have told him that he could leave the Labour Party if he didn't accept his junior position, or along those lines!

Will be interesting to hear the Burton interview on the radio.

Very hard to avoid the conclusion that the "super junior" thing was a sop to his ego. The idea first arose in the Rainbow Coalition, when DL's Dail numbers only warranted one full cabinet minister. It was done so their minister wouldn't be isolated in cabinet discussions. There is no similar justification when Labour has 5 full ministers. IMO, it reflects poorly on Penrose that he even accepted it.

philologos

Just a few minutes ago on RTÉ Radio 1 was listening to Charlie Bird talking with Joan Burton going on about how disappointing it was that she didn't get the Finance position. There were some strong insinuations that the female members of cabinet (herself and Fitzgerald) were given worse positions than others merely because of the fact that they were female.

I would actually be in agreement with temporary gender quotas alá Denmark in the 1970's and I actually do think that it is crucially important that more women take roles in Irish politics but in the case of Joan Burton and the finance post I just feel that Michael Noonan was just better for the position and that gender wasn't really a factor.

What about ye?

Tragedy

It's a crying shame that Richard Bruton didn't get it.

Noonan is a brilliant attack dog and great at saying "YOU CAN'T TALK TO US YOU RUINED THE ECONOMY" on TV shows, I've yet to see even a hint of any ability that seems to have entitled him to the Finance post.

positons should be on merit and ability only and not on gender or area.
We are trying to fix a country not pander to some regional demands of "I want a minister in my constituency" or the gender palava.


The media commentary is stupid.

Tragedy

Lyanna wrote: »

The fact that only 13% of the 2007-11 Dáil were women adds to my argument that women face obstacles that men don't, rather than detracting from it.

No it doesn't. You see that:
50% of Ireland is female
13% of TD's are female

Ergo, women face obstacles in becoming TD's.

You don't have causation. You have two facts and you assume that they are related and significant. Your argument isn't even flawed, it simply doesn't exist as you leave out any kind of causal link between the two.

Spacedog

Of course she's not qualified to be a senior minister, for christ sake she hasn't even got a cock. Sure Joan Burton is voice shrill and and annoying, but so is every auldone in the entire country! Every politiciam is a whiney complaining weasley gobshite, but at least they have the decency to tone it down to a monatone masculine husk.

This fuckin bitch talks sense, but in the tone of an auld one calling you in for your dinner when you're playing football. And for this reason she has no business in politics.

boards.ie, where

loud and stupid > common sense

...and proud of it!

PeakOutput

she sealed her own fate on vincent brown its as simple as that

PeakOutput

Centaur wrote: »

If 10% representation in the national parliament after 90 years is progress then it is glacial.

who do you blame for that though?

Joey the lips

This gender positive discrimination does not wash with me. Especially in politics. If you do surveys of political parties then you see the dominent membership is male not female.

We have had 2 female presidents and one of our ex presidents is un commisioner on human rights. What more can we do.

If women want to run in politics then they run if they dont they dont.

Joan did not get the job because in my opinion michael is viewed to be the better. Also bear in mind the finance minister nearly always ends up being prime minister so its grooming.

I dont enjoy listening to joan burton so i dont want her in this role.

As an accountant she will be good in welfare. No emotion just number crunching. I just want to see if they live up to there promise to reverse the cuts to

Carers
Blind
Invalid
Disabled

Inotherwords....All those that cannot change there situation by taking a job even if lower paying

Lyanna

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Yes, Irish women are less politically engaged than those in some other countries - it's your assumption that that's all due to apathy. Personally, I doubt Irish women are that inherently different from our Swedish, German or Dutch counterparts.

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Yes, and even 20 years ago Irish society was significantly more Catholic than it is now, and 40 years ago Catholicism was even more predominant. 20 years ago granting unmarried fathers rights of guardianship over their children wasn't even on the cards, now it's listed on the Labour Party's manifesto, and Page 52 of the Programme for Government includes pledges to "amend the Civil Partnership and Certain Rights and Obligations of Cohabiting Couples Act 2010 to address any anomalies or omissions, including those relating to children" and to "modernise and reform outdated elements of family law".

These things are current realities, but nothing says they're unchangeable.

.

electrictrad wrote: »

Being from a maths-orientated background, I am bound to be a little biased, but all the technological advances of the past 3,000 years were driven by the ingenuity of the engineering community. . [...]I believe it's far better for these imbalances to balance themselves out naturally when required, that way you don't inhibit anyone from making a real difference in an area where they are most suited to. . .politics in different places changes naturally to suit it's society. . .

As Centaur pointed out, women's participation in politics isn't something that occurred naturally. As for engineers - there are studies pointing to the fact that male teachers tend to have a positive effect on male students who lack role models. Engineers obviously have an effect on the world, but there is no equivalent documented "role-model" effect which is dependent on the gender of the engineer.

philologos

Besides. Social Welfare is a huge post. In fact having a Labour TD in social welfare is one of the better positions to put them. Fine Gael are interested in making huge cuts and in privatising a lot of public services (e.g Dublin Bus). Personally I think its a bad idea to privatise essential services to companies who are concerned only for profits rather than providing the absolute best service. There is a lot of sway that she can have in Social Welfare.

In an article in the Independent today the following was written about it:

The poor, the downtrodden and the nation's children: who else should be looking after them only a pair of women? Clearly the men are the only ones capable of the big, important, strategic jobs.

The outright shafting of Joan Burton was extraordinarily brazen, while the appointment of Frances Fitzgerald as Children's Minister was a ridiculous cliche.

Funnily enough I would regard dealing with the poor, the downtrodden and children to be one of the most significant positions in the Government. Indeed, I thought it was also one of the biggest spending Departments?

MagicMarker

Tragedy wrote: »

Noonan is a brilliant attack dog and great at saying "YOU CAN'T TALK TO US YOU RUINED THE ECONOMY" on TV shows, I've yet to see even a hint of any ability that seems to have entitled him to the Finance post.

Seriously? He always comes across very well on the subject of finance any time I've seen him.

coffee_cake

I was concerned until I saw the VB interview. Fool of herself - it's no wonder she didn't get it.

Spacedog

I think if they were both given a Leaving cert style assessment test in Economics and Finance Joan would do better.

The decision I believe was more to do with her political background, and she would not be likely to play ball with FG and NAMA without asking some uncomfortable questions.

The Sexism jibes in the media are simply a smokescreen to oversimplify this.

philologos

Spacedog wrote: »

I think if they were both given a Leaving cert style assessment test in Economics and Finance Joan would do better.

What are you basing this on?

Lyanna

Tragedy wrote: »

No it doesn't. You see that:
50% of Ireland is female
13% of TD's are female

Ergo, women face obstacles in becoming TD's.

You don't have causation. You have two facts and you assume that they are related and significant. Your argument isn't even flawed, it simply doesn't exist as you leave out any kind of causal link between the two.

I've cited documentation backing up my claims in other posts.

Also, that post was in response to a claim that two female Táinistí and two female Presidents was proof that women didn't face obstacles. I felt that that particular conclusion ignored many of the other numbers, so I cited figures about the rates of women ministers, and later the percentage of women in the Dáil as a whole.

Please read in context.

Nodin

Sam Smyth in the Indo gives an interesting slant on the affair -

Tanaiste Eamon Gilmore alone had the call on who would be Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform. Joan Burton was the hot favourite after her deft handing of the finance portfolio in opposition -- but Pat Rabbitte was tipped because of his trade union experience.

Mr Gilmore would have been aware of how some of his closest colleagues thought Ms Burton could be indecisive and occasionally shaky in a crisis.
And because Ms Burton is regarded as traditional Labour, who were there before the merger with Democratic Left, appointing Mr Rabbitte, an old comrade of the Tanaiste's, could reopen old wounds in the party.
Howlin had impressed everyone in the negotiations for government with Fine Gael and he is an ally of Joan Burton from the old Labour Party led by Dick Spring.

Appointing Mr Howlin gave Mr Gilmore cover for disappointing Ms Burton, but Ms Burton was said to be furious although she did secure a senior post in Social Protection.

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/analysis/sam-smyth-first-row-in-coalition-sets-labour-at-war-over-burton-2573618.html

Of course that begs the question as to whether it would have been better to move Burton to the side long before now.

I'd imagine Burton is seeking to garner sympathy with the accusation of sexism, something she seems to be rather over-eager to do. Personally I don't think theres any truth to it at all.

metrovelvet

Lyanna wrote: »

Yes, Irish women are less politically engaged than those in some other countries - it's your assumption that that's all due to apathy. Personally, I doubt Irish women are that inherently different from our Swedish, German or Dutch counterparts.


Yes, and even 20 years ago Irish society was significantly more Catholic than it is now, and 40 years ago Catholicism was even more predominant. 20 years ago granting unmarried fathers rights of guardianship over their children wasn't even on the cards, now it's listed on the Labour Party's manifesto, and Page 52 of the Programme for Government includes pledges to "amend the Civil Partnership and Certain Rights and Obligations of Cohabiting Couples Act 2010 to address any anomalies or omissions, including those relating to children" and to "modernise and reform outdated elements of family law".

These things are current realities, but nothing says they're unchangeable.

.


As Centaur pointed out, women's participation in politics isn't something that occurred naturally. As for engineers - there are studies pointing to the fact that male teachers tend to have a positive effect on male students who lack role models. Engineers obviously have an effect on the world, but there is no equivalent documented "role-model" effect which is dependent on the gender of the engineer.

I read recently that the reason for the lack of female engineers was partially due to the lack of female teachers in engineering and that young women who might start out with an inclination towards engineering back out because of the lack of female instruction.

http://www.slate.com/id/2286671/

Psych-Out Sexism
The innocent, unconscious bias that discourages girls from math and science.
By Shankar Vedantam
Posted Tuesday, March 1, 2011, at 7:04 AM ET

Barack and Michelle Obama recently invited Amy Chyao, a 16-year-old high-school junior from Texas who is working on a new cancer treatment, and Mikayla Nelson, a high-school freshman from Montana who designed an innovative solar-powered car, to sit in the first lady's box during the president's State of the Union Address.

It was a nice gesture, but the president didn't tell the truth about the girls. He left that to Eva Longoria's flighty character on Desperate Housewives.
"Now girls, if it were up to me, I'd say avoid math and science—they cause serious frown lines," Gabrielle Solis advised high-school students during a recent episode. "Young girls today need to know the dangers of long division."

Obama didn't mention that, as good as Chyao and Nelson might be at science and math, those subjects would not hold their interest in the long run. If they were like their peers, their proclivities would emerge once they finished college: When it came time to pick a profession, they would find their hearts were not in science and engineering.

Less than one in five professors of science and math at top research universities in the United States is a woman. The gender distribution of engineers at top Silicon Valley companies is similar to the gender distribution of the audience at your average strip club. Shouldn't the president have told girls like Chyao and Nelson to discover their real interests before wasting time on AP calculus?

Much has been written about why the number of women in science and math plummets as the intellectual demands in those fields rise with age. We've spent years arguing about potential differences in the brains of men and women (courtesy of the controversy spurred five years ago by the former head of President Obama's National Economic Council), the role of discrimination, and differences between men and women in the way they balance work and home life.

Most Americans believe the doors of opportunity are wide open to careers in science and math, a view that meshes perfectly with John Tierney's recent argument that worries about sexism are a distraction. (Alison Gopnik recently critiqued Tierney's claim in Slate.) Anyone can become a scientist or an engineer if she has the necessary interest, determination, and talent. If fewer women than men walk through those doors of opportunity, it has to be because fewer women than men have the necessary interest, determination, and talent. Fewer women than men freely choose to become scientists or engineers.

I'd like you to meet Jane Stout, Nilanjana Dasgupta, Matthew Hunsinger, and Melissa A. McManus. These psychologists at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst recently conducted experiments on this question. Their focus was on college students, but their work has broad implications for the way we think about education and fairness.

Stout, Dasgupta, and their colleagues wanted to find out why women's outstanding performance on science and math tests in high school and college correlates so weakly with their eventual interest in pursuing careers in those fields. In high school and college, girls increasingly earn math and science grades equal to or better than the grades of their male peers. But when it comes to choosing a career in math or science, more men than women choose to walk through those open doors.

The psychologists asked female students studying biology, chemistry, and engineering to take a very tough math test. All the students were greeted by a senior math major who wore a T-shirt displaying Einstein's E=mc2 equation. For some volunteers, the math major was male. For others, the math major was female. This tiny tweak made a difference: Women attempted more questions on the tough math test when they were greeted by a female math major rather than a male math major. On psychological tests that measured their unconscious attitudes toward math, the female students showed a stronger self-identification with math when the math major who had greeted them was female. When they were greeted by the male math major, women had significantly higher negative attitudes toward math.

In a more ambitious experiment organized with the university's math department, the psychologists evaluated how undergraduates performed when they had male or female math professors.

They measured, for instance, how often each student responded to questions posed by professors to the classroom as a whole. At the start of the semester, 11 percent of the female students attempted to answer questions posed to the entire class when the professor was male, and 7 percent of the female students attempted to answer questions posed to the entire class when the professor was female. By the end of the semester, the number of female students who attempted to answer questions posed by a male professor had not changed significantly: Only 7 percent of the women tried to answer such questions. But when classes were taught by a woman, the percentage of female students who attempted to answer questions by the semester's end rose to 46.

The researchers also measured how often students approached professors for help after class. Around 12 percent of the female students approached both male and female professors for help at the start of the semester. The number of female students approaching female professors was 14 percent at the end of the semester. But the number of female students asking for help from a male professor dropped to zero.
Finally, when Stout and Dasgupta evaluated how much the students identified with mathematics, they found that women ended up with less confidence in their mathematical abilities when their teachers were men rather than women. This happened even when women outperformed men on actual tests of math performance.

Think about that. On objective measures of math performance, these women were outscoring men. But their identification with mathematics was not tied to their interest, determination, or talent. It was connected to whether their teacher was a woman or a man.

These experiments suggest that subtle and unconscious factors skew the "free choices" we make. The career choices of men and women are affected far more by discrimination than by any innate differences between men and women. But it is not the kind of discrimination we usually talk about. We ought to assume that male math professors at the University of Massachusetts were just as committed to teaching young women as they were to teaching young men. And those professors were just as talented as their female counterparts. (The professors and students were not told the purpose of the experiment beforehand, so the female professors and female students couldn't have entered into some kind of pact to boost test scores.)
The traditional model of discrimination, in which people deliberately tip the scales in favor of one group over another, still applies in some cases. There are undoubtedly sexist professors. But overt sexism does not explain these findings. In fact, that model of discrimination might be an obstacle to overcoming the real challenge.

Our reasons for feeling suited to particular professions are only partially—and perhaps tangentially—tied to our interests, determination, and talent. More than three decades ago, psychotherapists at Georgia State University studied why some women, by all objective measures bright and talented, believed they were less gifted than they were. No matter the evidence, they believed they were imposters.

It is true that fewer women than men break into science and engineering careers today because they do not choose such careers. What isn't true is that those choices are truly "free."

Lyanna

I stand corrected; interesting article.

Tragedy

Lyanna wrote: »

I've cited documentation backing up my claims in other posts.

Also, that post was in response to a claim that two female Táinistí and two female Presidents was proof that women didn't face obstacles. I felt that that particular conclusion ignored many of the other numbers, so I cited figures about the rates of women ministers, and later the percentage of women in the Dáil as a whole.

Please read in context.

I did read it on context. You are constantly assuming things without causation and merely guessing and conjecturing that because one thing is true, another vaguely linked must.

The oireachtas report isn't documentation, it's parroting 'International Research' and architected by Ivana Bacik, a well known and biased proponent of Gender Quotas.

Tragedy

MagicMarker wrote: »

Seriously? He always comes across very well on the subject of finance any time I've seen him.

Yes, seriously. Noonan could have played the exact same role in any department(if Health had have been the hot topic of the election, you can bet he would have been on TV attacking FF over Health despite his actions as previous Minister of Health).

Bruton was shafted because of party politics. So much for new politics

Paddysnapper

PeakOutput wrote: »

she sealed her own fate on vincent brown its as simple as that

Sadly, not just on Vincent Brown but the speech she gave following the last FF budget when she was close to incoherent:eek:...For my 2 cents worth Richard Bruton would have been my No.1 choice..But nobody consulted me:rolleyes:

Thesafetyman

Heard the interview. I thought Charlie Bird was more interested in "Charlie" and a possible news headline pushing Joan for the answer "he" wanted. I'm not a party supporter but she is a Government Minister for God's sake and each one is important in its own right.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.