On Gender Equality at Workplace

Published at the Libertines Pub, Hong Kong

Let me make myself clear first in case someone suspects I’m a man: I hate that when women are paid less than men for the same kind of work. I hate that when people don’t take young women seriously because they bother to dress and groom nicely for work (to look “professional” somewhat means you have to desexualize yourself by wearing dark trouser suits and trimming your hair short, or at least putting it up). I also hate that when senior male executives make use of their position to pressurize their junior female colleagues into contributing to their sexual rejuvenation, be it faking laughs for their lame jokes (Ha-ha-ha), an “innocent” dinner for two or something more. And thanks to my career confidence, I’m always able to put up an indifferent blank face to such kind of invitations. Life is too short to worry about whether someone has crossed the line.

However, to assess gender equality by way of counting the number of men and women in certain industry, or in certain level of management, often becomes a misplacement of fact and value judgment. Take the construction industry for example, it’s a global phenomenon that male construction workers and engineers are far more than their female counterparts. Does it mean the industry has been barring equally qualified women from the industry because of their sex? What about it’s just a fact? Just a fact that qualified women for construction work happen to be less than men. Same applies to scientists and footballers. Feminists’ approach to place value judgment on the head count and conclude that males have been dominating the industry and scaring off women is like saying the drawing machine of Mark Six favours the particular 6 numbers and discriminates against the other 43.

In addition, what about women are just not that into certain industries, instead of being dominated or suppressed or enslaved by patriarchy as claimed by feminists?
Take judges as an example. The UK has been making effort to increase the number of female judges in higher courts but the result was less than promising. While people are still blaming the old boys’ network within the system, research found that women just do not fancy the job. They prefer the independence of being a self-employed barrister and dread handling bureaucracy. I suppose the same applies to the politics industry. The attractiveness of hanging out with Long Hair, staying awake to Stephen Lam’s speech and holding a smiling mask to Chinese officials is as depressing as having a sugar-free brownie.

Feminists may argue that even women are nowadays given equal opportunities in employment, there are barriers for them to rise to the top, mostly because they are held back by the traditional role of childbearing. If women have a choice and decide to choose family over career, is there anything wrong? That the idea is not as trendy as Sex and the City doesn’t mean it yields less value or happiness to the lives of women who embrace that idea. The argument is also based on the misconception that not making it to the Fortune 500 means you don’t have the same social respect. In fact, women not occupying half the list has no relation to their powers in reality, from making strangers to buy them drinks, driving men to work their ass off to keeping the retail industry alive and ruining a golfer’s career.

And let me assure you that the Libertines Pub never intend to be misogynistic just because I am the only woman among the seven contributers. It just happens to be a product of some bromance among the founders and I just bumped into them and happen to be a woman. In fact, my fellow contributors are all lady-loving gentlemen.