Most men in the public service oppose sexism, so why are so many silent?

This article is written by Neave Beard, lead for strengthening communities for Essex County Council, UK

My last article was a call to action for men in the public service. Specifically, it was a call for them to believe women’s stories of discrimination in the workplace. That article was about trust, a theme I’d like to explore again here, only this time I will bring both halves of the equation closer together.

Trust, as I’ve previously argued, is the first step to being a gender ally. But to really understand allyship is to recognise that trust is, after all, a symbiotic relationship. By definition, allyship is mutual, even where it urges one party to advance another. If men and women are ever going to tackle sexism together, men are going to need to hear and trust us, and we (women) will need to provide a space in which men can ask questions in good faith without judgement.

The progress of feminism has slowed since its inception, in part because so many of its earliest victories were over flagrant, in-your-face, indisputable inequalities. Another reason for this is what we might now call “implicit allyship”. By implicit allyship, I mean the idea that people today may acknowledge sexism, yet still do not call it out when confronted with it. This is often because in today’s world of covert, subtle, everyday sexism, they often don’t know what it is they’re looking for.

• Want to write for us? Take a look at Apolitical’s guide for contributors

We know that no-one likes to be told they’re wrong, and that no-one likes to be humiliated. We know too from our experience of social media that these two things are increasingly linked; that being told you’re wrong is to be, in some sense, wronged. As a result, people increasingly avoid websites, social engagements or even situations that they suspect will force them to confront things they don’t understand. And, if confronted against their will, they will tend to hold steadfast to their default point of view.

Empowering male allies to spot sexism and call it out when women aren’t around, therefore, is not as simple as giving them a script to take to work.

A conversation, not a script

Women’s networks need to create spaces that neither dilute the message they want to send, nor avoid issues raised from the point of view of men. To be sure, men who engage with these networks will not understand completely. This should not be taken as pushback however, but rather as dialogue, which can solidify learning and ultimately empower men to call out sexism where they see it.

We need men to trust us when we speak about our experiences, but we also need to give them a dedicated space where they can get it wrong.

A good example of a network like this in action is the #isitok segment on ‘The last leg,’ where audience members submit questions via Twitter to a panel of disabled people. The questions are answered with a sense of humour, yet are grounded in personal experiences. Crucially, both sides are encouraged to listen and be heard without judgement.

If you have seen a colleague engage in subtle sexism at work, whether they do so out of misguidedness or misinformation, I would suggest approaching them discreetly in person. Offer to be their sounding board, to have a one-to-one, judgement-free chat about how what they did or said may be perceived, and how to approach it differently next time.

I am a firm believer that most people are good, but that most people tend to be missguided on subjects that don’t speak to their experiences. I’m sure you all know someone who, despite acting like an ally, doesn’t like to use the word ‘feminist’. For some reason the historic, sociological and political connotations of the term still outweigh its fundamental meaning. I know one such ally. It always surprised me how animated he got when anyone mentioned feminism, yet he was simultaneously one of the most polite, caring and supportive men I know.

On one occasion, we were discussing the concept of mansplaining, not in a formally decreed listening forum, but as part of an inherently non-judgemental meeting of minds. All of the women in the meeting were recounting times it had happened to them, yet you could see it wasn’t quite clicking with him. “Someone talking down to you, that happens to everyone, right?”

Well yes, we explained, but intentions are not uniform, and spotting belittlement in someone’s tone and the person they choose to target is tough. So, when a week or so later a female colleague found an article explaining exactly what mansplaining is in amazingly simple terms, she sent it to him. He may still not totally understand the experiences we described to him, but he understands much better the principle itself, and you can’t take that for granted.

Learning to read between the lines

These tactics aren’t easy or pain-free to deploy. They invite criticism, fear and exhaustion. One way for us to make progress is to start circulating reading lists at work. We know real stories are what resonate with people, and that stats rarely have the same impact.

Get your directors involved in announcing an organisation-wide book week where you read, for example, ‘Invisible women’ by Caroline Criado-Perez (or any book that takes a feminist angle on relevant topics). In a more informal sense, within your teams or your families, find out what topics people most enjoy, and suggest a book that just so happens to have a feminist angle. ‘Ladies can’t climb ladders’ by Jane Robinson is a great one for the history buffs.

Whatever you choose to read, do so with a view to creating a mutually supportive environment between male and female colleagues. It’s uncomfortable for anyone to be invited to talk about a subject on which they are a novice compared to most people present. Everyone tends to want to help by leading from the front, rather than by listening to what is needed.

This isn’t just a flaw in feminist allyship. My master’s degree dissertation was on the subject of international aid. The conclusion, unsurprisingly, was that developed countries rarely ask what people in developing countries really need before acting to ‘aid’ the situation. Rather, they impose an understanding of that situation, and go from there, the result of which is that their efforts are often unsuccessful. This is certainly not a recent revelation, but it is one we might use to fix feminist allyship.

What we need now

We need, first of all, to disentangle help from knowledge. Male allies shouldn’t see the help they offer women as a form of knowledge they own, but rather as a resource offered in response to women’s knowledge about sexism.

Second, we need to offer allies a safe space in which to not completely understand how sexism operates. This is our responsibility for bringing men on side in the fight against sexism. Providing the desire to listen and learn is there, men will be able to call-out sexism more confidently simply by having a place to ask simple questions. The more confident men are, the more today’s complex forms of sexism will be called out in the absence of women, as well as when they are present.

We need men to trust us when we speak about our experiences, but we also need to give them a dedicated space where they can get it wrong. Doing so will mean they are less likely to get it wrong in ways that will cause harm and will actively stop others from doing so as well. I believe most men want to be feminist allies. And for those who do, for those that listen to us and trust us, it is down to women in the public service to dismantle the barriers that are stopping men from being truly active allies. — Neave Beard

We want to hear what you think about this article. Pitch an article to us or send your comments to hello@apolitical.co

(Picture Credit: Pexels)