ASK Musings

No matter where you go, there you are.

Daily Archive: 06/05/2019

Monday

6

May 2019

0

COMMENTS

Invisible Women by Caroline Criado Perez

Written by , Posted in Reviews

Four Stars

 

Best for:
People looking for hard facts on how the lack of data collected about women harms us.

In a nutshell:
Much of ruling society treats (cis) men as the default, dismissing the needs of women as abnormal. This screws us over.

Worth quoting:
“Like so many of the decisions to exclude women in the interests of simplicity, from architecture to medical research, this conclusion could only be reached in a culture that conceives of men as the default human and women as a niche aberration.”

Why I chose it:
I wanted some hard facts to support something I was already generally aware of.

Review:
I really struggled with picking up this book. Normally I wouldn’t because the topics is right up my alley. It’s non-fiction. It’s written by a woman. It talks about sexism. It focuses on statistics and data. That’s my jam! Except the author is a problematic feminist and I hate that she is the one who wrote this book, because she has a real problem with the idea of cis women (she wants to be called woman by default, not a cis woman, necessarily othering trans women. Oh the irony). Which means this book never once gives even a sidebar mention of the fact that some of the data gaps she is focused on are even worse for trans women. She also quotes a transphobic woman (Sarah Ditum) in the first few pages. I wish she were a better on this, but here we are.

The fact is, she has written an interesting and easy-to-read book that should piss everyone off. From data gaps about unpaid care work and women’s contributions to the economy to the fact that women metabolize and react to medications differently than men (but are often barely represented in studies — if they are included at all), she looks at the literally hundreds of ways that society places the needs of men in general above the needs of women in general, and the impact it has on how we navigate the world.

Obviously this requires some generalizations. For example, many of the areas focus on women’s role as caretaker, specifically as a mother. I’m not a mother and never will be, so I don’t fit in that realm. But I recognize that overwhelmingly most women will at some point have a child, so I appreciate that not taking that into account will harm many, many women.

Some were areas I’d been aware of before, though not in this level of detail. But other things were light-bulb moments. Early on in the book she talks about the planning of public space and public transportation, and some of the revelations were, looking back, obvious, but also so insidious as to not have occurred to me before.

The focus on the average man’s life experience as the default informs so many decisions in our world, and that means women get left out, left behind, and actively harmed. And the solution is to collect — and the use — more data, but there’s a problem there, as the gatekeepers for things like funding scientific studies are overwhelmingly dudes, and they don’t see the need for studying women-specific issues, or even disaggregating data by sex or gender.

There aren’t easy solutions that corporations and governments are just going to accept and implement. My biggest take-away from this is to be alert to any new studies I read that generalize about people, and to be an outspoken advocate to ensure that new initiatives at the government level have taken into account the lives not just of men, but of women, as well as people in other demographic groups.

Keep it / Pass to a Friend / Donate it / Toss it:
Keep it.

Monday

6

May 2019

0

COMMENTS

Asshole Fifty-Eight

Written by , Posted in Assholes

Originally published on 6 May 2019.

Late last week, the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) upheld the (misogynistic and racist) International Association of Athletics Federations(IAAF) rule about testosterone levels in women racing in middle-distance athletics events. While the ruling applies to all runners in that category, it’s clear that the ruling exists because Caster Semenya is a better athlete that some women, and those women decided to complain about it to the IAAF.

For those of you not familiar with the issue, Vox has written about it here. Another article that gets at the heart of the issue is this one by Ruth Wood. It is true that Caster Semenya may have a natural advantage because she has increased testosterone levels, but it is also true that there are loads of other natural advantages that male athletes have. However, those are celebrated while Semenya’s are literally legislated away to the point that she’s being directed to take unnecessary pharmaceuticals so she can continue to compete.

That’s bullshit, the rule is ridiculous, and the people who are cheering the CAS ruling are, to be frank, acting like assholes.

The example used by many people (including a Washington Post article that is behind a pay wall, so I may be repeating some of what is said there) is Michael Phelps. The man has an abnormally large wingspan and produces 50% less lactic acid than the average person. If we are to deem genetic gifts or abnormalities as unfair advantages, then shouldn’t Phelps be required to, I don’t know, wear some sort of contraption that adjusts for his wingspan? Or take medication to make sure he produces more lactic acid?

No? Really? What’s the difference?

I’ve seen some people argue that this comes down to who gets to be female and who gets to be male in sport. And yes, the discussion about transgender athletes is one to have, because we now know that gender is a spectrum and doesn’t always conform to the one assigned at birth. But the thing is, Caster Semenya is not transgender. She is cisgender. She happens to produce more testosterone. And she’s used that advantage to make herself a better athlete. That should not be an issue.

What’s so disappointing here is that the issue is most commonly argued by white women, many of whom are not as good at running middle distances as Caster Semenya. There’s a bitterness to their complaints, as though if not for this injustice, they would have a gold medal. But that’s horseshit. One of the women who is most vocal about this, Lynsey Sharp, came in 6th behind Semenya. So, you eliminate Semenya from the field and come in 5th? At the expense of taking down a talented black woman for no defensible reason?

Paula Radcliff, a talented long-distance runner, has also been quite vocal on twitter and before the IAAF. Unfortunately, instead of supporting a fellow woman runner, she’s been upholding racism and misogyny herself. It’s disgusting, and something I’ve noticed seems prevalent in feminism here in the UK: the famous white feminists here have a narrow view of what it means to be a woman, and are often transphobic. It’s not a good look, UK.

So, to those supporting the IAAF rule and the CAS ruling I say this: welcome to the Asshole Hall of Fame. You’re in shit company, so you should probably do something about that.