Who Wears the Trousers: exploring the status of women in the workplace by Esme Nicholas
Introduction
In January 2021 UCIL piloted a new module on Equality, Diversity and Inclusion that began with a historical overview of social reform and legal frameworks around EDI. Students enrolled on ‘Equality, Diversity and Inclusion: Your Role in Shaping a Fairer World’ were asked to complete an assignment in which they found and evaluated a historical source. This was in a response to blog post created by the University of Manchester Special Collections called ‘Gender, Race and Disability: what do the archives tell us?
We are delighted to share samples of student work submitted for assessment on this module. We would like to thank Esme Nicholas for permission to include her interesting reflection on women in the work place. Esme’s blog was inspired by a photograph from Arthur Reavil’s photographic Album of Women’s Work in Wartime held at The John Rylands Research Institute and Library
Who Wears the Trousers by Esme Nicholas
“The past is a foreign country: they do things differently there” [1]. This quote speaks to the utility of archives in helping us see into the past and understand our present. The picture on the left offers a stark reminder as to the way women disrupted social norms during the First World War. At first glance, there is nothing abnormal about the women pictured. Yet a closer look provides an insight into what I refer to as ‘pant politics’, a concept which helps us explore developments in the status of women in the workplace.
“The past is a foreign country: they do things differently there”.
Trousers were the preserve of the breadwinners, the man of the house, and therefore clothing was incredibly important in defining ‘the class you came from’ [2] and acting as ‘a powerful reflection of status’ [3}. The wider acceptance of trousers means we now wouldn’t blink twice at Kamala Harris as she poses in a pantsuit for the Time Magazine. Harris is proof of some progress in attitudes towards women in the workplace. Yet, pant politics is still indicative of the reality of gender equality. The very use of the word ‘pantsuit’ illustrates how when it comes to work and professionalism, women are often still the non-standard version of the traditional man in a suit.
60% of men and 45% of women (globally) wrongly believed that gender equality has been achieved [4]. Before we laugh that off, it’s easy to think that with the Equality Act [5] here in the UK and other anti-discrimination regulations, gender inequality can’t exist. Yet we only need to glance at our current situation to show this isn’t the case. Perceptions around the role of women in society mirror that of wartime, when archaic views of the ‘typical family’ shaped women’s opportunities. Becker and Hakim [6] are amongst many academics who have perpetuated discriminatory stereotypes and articulate why women are still disadvantaged in the workplace. Becker insists it is based on biological differences between the sexes (that are reinforced by women) which make them less productive than men [7]. Similarly, Hakim coined the Preference Theory [8] which determines women’s preferences or ‘tastes’ as reasons for women’s lower position in employment [9]. When discrimination is dismissed on the grounds of assumed preference, what hope is there for women in the workplace? Theories like this undermine the advantages afforded to men in the workplace that enable them to conform to the ‘ideal worker’ concept.
So maybe it isn’t as simple as a choice. The unequal division of domestic work describes how women typically hold responsibility for the workings of the family home. Were this made equal for both men and women, a choice would not need to be made and it may be that Becker and Hakim’s theories are undermined. Employers need to act accordingly to adopt practices that accommodate women but also encourage men to share the responsibilities that are reinforcing the archaic stereotypes of women. This might be in the form of equal parental leave which is encouraged by the employer and has no bearing on the person’s career. These ‘work-life balance’ policies could benefit from statutory backing which would help change the trajectory of women’s position in the workplace. For any progress to be made, we all need to wear the trousers, equally.
References:
[1] Hartley, L.P, The Go-Between (1953), Hamish Hamilton
[2] J Summers, ‘Fashion on the Ration: How World War 2 finally let women wear the trousers’ (The Telegraph, 5 March 2015)<http://fashion.telegraph.co.uk/newsfeatures/
TMG11446271/Fashion-on-the-Ration-how-World-War-2-finally-let-womenwear- the-trousers.html> accessed 18 March 2021
[3] Ibid.
[4] Doward, J. (2017). ‘Women have achieved equality at long last … according to men’. The Guardian, 29.01.2017 https:// www.theguardian.com/society/2017/jan/29/women-inequality-survey
[5] Equality Act 2010
[6] Becker, G. (1991). A Treatise on the Family, Cambridge Mass.: Harvard University Press Hakim, C. (2000). Work-lifestyle choices in the 21st century. Preference theory: Oxford University Press.
[7] Ibid, Becker
[8] Ibid, Hakim
[9] Ibid.
Pictures sourced from: Album of Women’s Work in Wartime
- 1914–1919, VPH.5 John Rylands Library University of Manchester, Digital Collections
- Nolwen Cifuentes for TIME Magazine, 2020
