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

CDfm

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.

Not just for you tragedy - but for everyone.

I am trying to discuss Joan Burton here and these things have what to do with Burton & Howlin and the operation of the coallition.

The gender quota is covered elsewhere.

Burton was born in 1949 which makes her 61 - so this is as high as she gets folks. Howlin is 7 years her junior. Was this significant.

Is Burton alligned to and does she have a power base in the womens movement - they have called Howlin a safe pair of balls. Did they want their woman in. Are they pissed off.

Is there an old boys network in the Labour Party and the Unions that prevents female advancement.

So what is happening here and what are we seeing played out ?

philologos

100% in agreement. I'm just absolutely bejoggled at the media response to this in that it seems so irrational.

Lyanna

Tragedy wrote: »

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.

International research, not "International Research". If you have doubts about its authenticity or reliability, then provide evidence to back up those doubts. Putting a phrase in inverted commas is a lazy way of casting aspersions on its value without backing your insinuation up with evidence.

Also, if you have a problem with the documentation I provided, you should have expressed that in your previous post instead of claiming that I hadn't provided any evidence. I clearly had.

CDfm

Lyanna wrote: »

International research, not "International Research". If you have doubts about its authenticity or reliability, then provide evidence to back up those doubts. Putting a phrase in inverted commas is a lazy way of casting aspersions on its value without backing your insinuation up with evidence.

Also, if you have a problem with the documentation I provided, you should have expressed that in your previous post instead of claiming that I hadn't provided any evidence. I clearly had.

And how do these relate specifically to the LP, Howlin, Burton and the coallition????

Anywhoodle

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Oh hang on now.. Like her or not, it's highly unfair to say that all she has done is "waffle" post-crisis. Burton, of all the Opposition TDs, was one of the few who was tenacious enough to force FF to admit to the grim realities of our situation. She was an absolute rottweiler in terms of extracting key details that the former Gov. were desperately trying to keep under the rug. At the very least, she (unlike her counterparts in certain other parties) deserves credit for bringing crucial info. into the public domain. She (v.loudly!) led the charge on a lot of the issues that showed FF for what they really are. Some people have short memories.. might be worth having a look back over some of her PQs.

For example, wasn't it Burton who persisted in throwing numerous PQs at Lenihan until eventually he confessed that BOI gave incorrect info. to his Dept. re. the payment of bonuses to its staff? Resulted in an investigation being instigated, etc... I also remember Burton being the one to flag the fact (again through a PQ) that the bulk of Anglo-Irish bond-holders were quietly paid off within 2 years of the bank guarantee coming in.. Again, something Lenihan had been less than forthcoming about. I could go on and on.. Relatively speaking, she's certainly not what I'd consider an "asleep at the wheel" politician. At least she succeeded, where others failed, in clearing up a lot of unhelpful misinformation.

In saying that her post-crisis policies were 'non-commital' (arguably a Labour Party trade-mark anyway?!), it is probably worth remembering that Labour were the only party to oppose the bank guarantee.. Burton's been credited with pushing that policy and it's certainly something that her party have been making hay out of ever since..

PS. "demanded" a top position in the Dept. of Finance? Really? Any basis for that whatsoever? Looks to me like she's been handling this entire debacle with a lot of good grace.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Tragedy

Lyanna wrote: »

International research, not "International Research". If you have doubts about its authenticity or reliability, then provide evidence to back up those doubts. Putting a phrase in inverted commas is a lazy way of casting aspersions on its value without backing your insinuation up with evidence.

Also, if you have a problem with the documentation I provided, you should have expressed that in your previous post instead of claiming that I hadn't provided any evidence. I clearly had.

International Research has little or no bearing as obstructions facing females in Ireland entering politics. Unless you are arguing that the irish electoral system, irish political parties, irish constituencies, irish voters, irish culture, the irish economy and irish childcare is fairly similar to the countries that the international research focused on.

All of which I'll be happy to prove not to be true. Evidence of something in another country is not evidence of something in Ireland, against you are linking two vaguely related things without finding causation, once again proving my initial point.

Your logic isn't logical, your points lack validity.

Good day

Bullseye1

The amount of nonsense being written about this subject. Joan Burton made an ass of herself and was shown to be a loose cannon on VB.

The bigger question here is how is she going to reduce the 20 billion her department spends each year.

hatrickpatrick

What ARE these "5 C's"?
They are constantly brought up in these debates by that title, but no one ever actually specifies what they are. Sounds like an ideal smokescreen to me. Bring up a set of points but don't actually STATE those points for the debate.

So then, what are the 5 Cs?

Tragedy

Childcare(apparently the same in Zambia as it is in Ireland)
Cash(see above)
Culture(see above)
Confidence(see above)
Candidate selection procedure(see above)

Macha

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Actually, Ireland has one of the highest levels of gender divide in professions. Personally, I think our gender-divided primary and secondary school system has a lot to do with forming mentalities along more gendered lines than in countries where the education system doesn't make such a fuss about whether you're a boy or girl. Then of course there's the practicalities of being in a school that offers technical drawing, applied maths etc. I went to a girls school where neither of these was offered.

The statistics you refer to above are for students in university, Permabear, and it's well known that women don't do as well in the workforce as during their studies. We're not taking about benighted patriarchies and that is a bit of a strawman there. We're talking about Irish society, which does a pretty good job of hanging onto gendered stereotypes for men and women, which other countries have long since shaken off.

On an aside, if female students are affected by the gender of their teacher, it would lend credence to the idea that the prevalence of women in primary and secondary teaching is a factor in boys not doing as well. Interesting.

metrovelvet

Maybe if they started teaching political science instead of religion we might get somewhere.

Yes there is a boys and education crisis - another topic though. There is also a what is the point of a university degree crisis also? As well as the insitutional factory mceducation model of primary -secondary. Its all connected. Cant match up the dots on Joan Burton thread.

CDfm

Anywhoodle wrote: »

For example, wasn't it Burton who persisted in throwing numerous PQs at Lenihan until eventually he confessed that BOI gave incorrect info. to his Dept. re. the payment of bonuses to its staff? Resulted in an investigation being instigated, etc... I also remember Burton being the one to flag the fact (again through a PQ) that the bulk of Anglo-Irish bond-holders were quietly paid off within 2 years of the bank guarantee coming in.. Again, something Lenihan had been less than forthcoming about. I could go on and on.. Relatively speaking, she's certainly not what I'd consider an "asleep at the wheel" politician. At least she succeeded, where others failed, in clearing up a lot of unhelpful misinformation.

Actually - she is a Chartered Accountant in a party that has union links so you could argue that she used the information she obtained thru her union links for her political advantage as opposed to the national interest.

It is not what I would have done and the LP seemed to have policies based around union activity.

Investigators and regulators have had a very difficult time getting the truth from the banks and their employees whereas here is someone who knows.

The question is now will she use this information and her contacts in the national interest ???

She didnt help clearing up misinformation -she knew it was misinformation and didnt act but used it to make a political point.

In saying that her post-crisis policies were 'non-commital' (arguably a Labour Party trade-mark anyway?!), it is probably worth remembering that Labour were the only party to oppose the bank guarantee.. Burton's been credited with pushing that policy and it's certainly something that her party have been making hay out of ever since...

She would probably be an exceptional junior Minister at the Department of Finance and could overhaul the place.

Centaur

metrovelvet wrote: »

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.

As Lyanna says, interesting article. I heard a scientist on the radio the other morning (can't remember her name). She said that whenever she is giving a talk to female students about science one of the first things she does is to ask them to close their eyes and imagine a scientist. Invariably they think of a man.

Valmont

After Joan Burton's dismal public performances I can understand perfectly why labour wanted to keep her away from some of the more delicate portfolios. She is a PR disaster zone and I'm surprised people are ignoring her abysmal failure as labour's finance spokesperson while FF were on their destructive rampage.

Man, woman, alien, chocolate bar; Burton is as inept as politicians come.

Centaur

PeakOutput wrote: »

who do you blame for that though?

This topic is covered more fully in the Gender Quotas thread.

PeakOutput

Macha wrote: »

The statistics you refer to above are for students in university, Permabear, and it's well known that women don't do as well in the workforce as during their studies. .

Lets assume for a moment that that is true, what, exactly, do you think the reasons for it are?

CDfm

Centaur wrote: »

As Lyanna says, interesting article. I heard a scientist on the radio the other morning (can't remember her name). She said that whenever she is giving a talk to female students about science one of the first things she does is to ask them to close their eyes and imagine a scientist. Invariably they think of a man.

Ok close your eyes think of a union leader and and the LP leadership and womens groups and what do you think of

PeakOutput

Centaur wrote: »

This topic is covered more fully in the Gender Quotas thread.

I am not asking for the topic to be covered i am asking you what you blame for the perceived inequality in politics

Centaur

CDfm wrote: »

And how do these relate specifically to the LP, Howlin, Burton and the coallition????

Debates are like conversations and tend to go off in tangents to the original topic. Attempts to drag them back often prove fruitless. I had the same problem on the Gender Quotas thread.:)

Centaur

PeakOutput wrote: »

I am not asking for the topic to be covered i am asking you what you blame for the perceived inequality in politics

What I am saying is that I have addressed your question in the thread that I pointed you towards. I don't think it is necessary to repeat myself here and take this thread completely off topic.

Macha

PeakOutput wrote: »

Lets assume for a moment that that is true, what, exactly, do you think the reasons for it are?

You don't have to assume - it's the truth.

I've referred to some of the causes in our gendered primary and secondary school system in terms of careers that women and men choose. I think there's definitely more motivation for men to do well as they feel a sense of duty to be the bread-winner for their families. Plus the fact that men can't take any parental leave means that women take all the maternity leave.

In terms of sharing child care after that, I'm not sure it's so equally divided. Often, at that stage men are already earning more than their partners (the fact that men are normally older than their partners is a factor in this) and so it makes economic sense for the woman's career to go ion the the back burner. Maybe the attitudes of managers towards men looking for more flexibility is any issue? And our government isn't too bothered about subsidising childcare facilities for parents.

There is also research that shows that women are punished by men and women when asking for a raise or bonus. I'll try to find the link again. Let's be clear - women are very good at perpetuating old gender divides just as well as men. This isn't a blame game - it's about finding solutions that make things better for everyone concerned.

More generally, I think there are issues around confidence. There was a study done a few years ago whereby a job was advertised with a salary of €80k. No women applied. But when the same job was advertised with a salary of €40k, a number of women applied. Women are brought up to be the supporter, the nurturer, not the main attraction.

Of course these cultural values vary wildly from family to family all over the place but I think we're still very much behind the curve when it comes to gender equality. Family law very much discriminates against men and we still have a reference to the woman's work in the home in our constitution. I think most Scandinavians would be shocked at Article 41.2.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Lyanna

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

This is a strawman, as Macha rightly points out. I have not been saying that Ireland is a benighted patriarchy or that it is impossible for women to succeed here. All I have been saying is that women should not face additional difficulties simply because they are women. I have said variants of this repeatedly.

Lyanna wrote: »

Yes, women can and do achieve politically in Ireland, so it is clearly not impossible for women to do so.The question is, is it harder for women to achieve in politics than it is for men? Are there obstacles that exist for women but not for men? If so, then gender discrimination does exist.

Lyanna wrote: »

Exceptional women will always succeed. That doesn't mean that women and men have an equal opportunity to succeed.

Gender stereotypes don't have to be "rampant" to exist; subtle will do just fine.

.

Tragedy wrote: »

Evidence of something in another country is not evidence of something in Ireland, against you are linking two vaguely related things without finding causation, once again proving my initial point.

"Ireland" and "the rest of the world" are not exactly unrelated, and European trends in particular are relevant to Irish ones. These sources for the report specifically deal with women in politics in a European and/or Irish context:

Drude Dahlerup & Lenita Friedenvall, Electoral Gender Quota Systems and their Implementation in Europe (European Parliament, Brussels; 2008), p17.
European Commission, Women in European Politics – time for action (Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities; 2009).
European Commission for Democracy Through Law, Report on the Impact of Electoral Systems on Women’s Representation in Politics (Adopted by the Council for Democratic Election, Venice; 2009).
Kathleen Knight, Yvonne Galligan, & Una Nic Giolla Choille, “Equalizing Opportunities for Women in Electoral Politics in Ireland: The Views of Women Members of Parliament”, in Women and Politics (Vol. 26(1) 2004; pp1-20).
National Women’s Council of Ireland, Irish Politics: Jobs for the Boys!, (Dublin; 2002).
Seamus McGuinness, Elish Kelly, Tim Callan, & Philip J. O’Connell, The Gender Wage Gap in Ireland (The Equality Authority, Ireland; 2009).
Yvonne Galligan, “Women in Politics” (pp272-301) in John Coakley & Michael Gallagher (Eds.) Politics in the Republic of Ireland, (Routledge; 2006), p273.

Dave!

Jakkass wrote: »

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

I've asked a couple of people before, but this still isn't clear to me, so maybe you can clear it up.

Why is it necessary that we have an equal number of women as men in politics? Can men not make good decisions that affect women? And does that therefore mean that women cannot adequately make decisions that affect men?

And why should these quotas be introduced to politics, but not other areas? Nursing is dominated by women, as I imagine is hairdressing and childcare. Men probably dominate the engineering and construction sectors. Shouldn't there be sexual parity in these industries too?

And finally, why is gender the important factor when it comes to quotas? It seems a bit arbitrary to assign such significance to gender, as opposed to say, race, nationality, or gender.

Is the logical conclusion to this that, at the very least in the political arena, but perhaps in other areas too, we should endeavour to match the demographic makeup of the country, as determined by the census? Adjust the number of TDs so that the Dáil accurately mirrors the general population?

I say -- forget about all that bullsh*t, and let everyone get in on merit. Once they're there, everyone should be treated the same in so far as possible.

metrovelvet

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zDZFcDGpL4U

Paradigms of Education

Girls are socialised to be more compliant which works well with the current factory model of education.

ALso more and more people are seeing no point in a college degree. Working class boys are under more peer pressure to hang out on the street than the girls are.

However, once they are out onto the workforce its a different kettle of fish.

philologos

Dave! wrote: »

I've asked a couple of people before, but this still isn't clear to me, so maybe you can clear it up.

Sure.

Dave! wrote: »

Why is it necessary that we have an equal number of women as men in politics? Can men not make good decisions that affect women? And does that therefore mean that women cannot adequately make decisions that affect men?

I don't believe it is necessary that we have exactly the same number of women, but I do believe that it is necessary to have more than a shoddy figure of 13%. Women need to be represented in the Dáil. Women have specific concerns some of which are better related to by women.

The idea also has to do with strong women in leadership positions. Strong women not in the sense that they act like men, but women in their own right playing a role in key positions in politics. I believe it sends a message to children about the status of women in society if there are barely any in political decision making. I also believe that more women would be encouraged to run for election and take part in this brilliant thing that we call democracy if there were more women role-models in politics to look up to in the same way that men can be encouraged and inspired by male role-models.

If society is to move past the idea of woman as home maker and man as bread earner we need to see this practically in a number of ways first. I'm pretty sure that there are lots of women who are equally capable to any man for any of the positions in the Government but many women never take the chance to get out there and run. As I see it that's something that we should look at.

I've also clearly stated that the quota would be temporary rather than permanent.

Dave! wrote: »

And why should these quotas be introduced to politics, but not other areas? Nursing is dominated by women, as I imagine is hairdressing and childcare. Men probably dominate the engineering and construction sectors. Shouldn't there be sexual parity in these industries too?

Nobody in any of these positions makes key decisions for the running of our country. Being a politician isn't just a job as far as I see it. It is a position of significant power, and when that arises there should be a representative base to be able to make decisions fairly.

Dave! wrote: »

And finally, why is gender the important factor when it comes to quotas? It seems a bit arbitrary to assign such significance to gender, as opposed to say, race, nationality, or gender.

51% of Irish people are women. 13% are TD's. As for nationality the Dáil is meant to represent the Irish people and to ensure that the rights of other residents are upheld as far as I see it when you come to Ireland you're a part of the Irish project.

I'm pretty iffy on race admittedly. That's where I start to see a weakness in my position being honest with you.

Dave! wrote: »

Is the logical conclusion to this that, at the very least in the political arena, but perhaps in other areas too, we should endeavour to match the demographic makeup of the country, as determined by the census? Adjust the number of TDs so that the Dáil accurately mirrors the general population?

Well the idea of PRSTV is that the number of seats are proportional to the population base in a given area. I think that is the case give or take. Adjusting the regional proportion is pretty easy, in the next election just change the number of seats per constituency.

Dave! wrote: »

I say -- forget about all that bullsh*t, and let everyone get in on merit. Once they're there, everyone should be treated the same in so far as possible.

I think merit is important, but that we need to take more effort in encouraging women to run, and they are less likely to run if they think that "that's a man's job". Seeing strong women in politics is the first step to breaking that assumption.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

metrovelvet

You keep pointing to third level education as the marker of who is faring better and who isn't when we all know third level education means very little anymore.

Macha

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

I would agree with the sentiment that both genders face different challenges. As I said before, women outperform men in terms of education but when it comes to careers and salaries, men still outperform women.

It's interesting you mention the "cool to be dumb" thing. I was speaking to an American undergrad the other day, who told me it's a serious problem in the US. She majors in politics but feels she can't discuss current affairs issues with fellow students as she's frequently mocked for being a nerd. Terrifying!

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

In fairness, the current situation is quite unusual with the majority of unemployment coming from the male-dominated construction sector (which supports my idea of very gendered professions). The latest figures show unemployment rising among women now as areas such as retail and services are feeling the recession. But you're right that it's a massive problem. The incentives were too strong for these young men to stay in education and it's going to be difficult to upskill them for future employment. I hope it's an issue that the new government makes a priority.

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Do they? wow - do you have a link?

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

All as it should be It's funny - Im in my late 20s and up until now, many of my female friends talked about leaving work to stay at home full time when they had children. Now that's much closer to becoming a reality, they've all completely changed their minds and can't bear the idea of sitting at home all day with no adults to speak to. But then again I'm middle-class. Maybe things haven't changed as much in different socio-economic sectors.