Sexism is so deeply entrenched that we are no longer even aware of it | opinion

Why are there so few women in the House of Representatives? BNNVARA recently asked this question in an article on its website. Broadly speaking, the conclusion is that female politicians disproportionately face aggression and intimidation and are taken less seriously than men, causing them to leave and other women to think twice before entering politics.

The article fits into a series of similar articles, TV and radio broadcasts, with the same scope and often the same conclusion. Since Sigrid Kaag and other female politicians announced their departure because of the aggression they have to endure, there has been discussion about sexism in politics. Rightly so.

But now that we are finally having this debate, we should not limit ourselves to politics. In business, women face exactly the same obstacles, with the same consequences for the distribution of power.

Sensitive topic

Sexism in business is a sensitive topic. When I provide training to make managers aware of the implicit prejudices they have about female talent, I often encounter resistance. Emancipation is complete, isn’t it? Do women not get the same opportunities as men? These are rhetorical questions that men and women ask.

In an environment where meritocracy has been canonized, the lack of women at the top is preferred to be attributed to the women themselves. They would be too little assertive, too little ambitious, too little visible and, on the other hand, too insecure, too sensitive, too modest. If women want to participate, they have to learn to play the game. For many, it is a beautiful, because practical theory, completely in line with the idea that success is a choice and no one is a victim.

Only, it’s not right. Women have been taught all the rules of the game in specially designed leadership programs over the past decades, but it has done little to change the male dominance at the top. The problem is not with women, it is with sexism that is so deeply entrenched that we are no longer even aware of it.

Different feedback for men and women

That is the only possible conclusion from the increasing number of studies into the lack of diversity in business. For example, researchers from Stanford University and others showed that there are significant differences in how women and men receive feedback.

For example, women in high positions receive explicit criticism of their performance significantly more often than men (70 percent versus 2 percent). Women also receive 30 percent more exaggerated feedback than men (‘you always miss your deadlines, you are never visible’), they are eleven times more likely to be labeled ‘blunt’ and seven times more likely to be called ‘stubborn’. Men, on the other hand, are almost four times more likely to be called ‘brilliant’ or ‘genius’.

Other standards

Even when the feedback is constructive, there are differences. Recent research shows that female leaders are often advised to focus more on concrete results of their work, while male leaders are encouraged to develop a vision. Managerial men are also more often told that they should take on their role even more emphatically, while women are more often told that they should show others a little more respect. In short: different standards apply to women and men.

In addition, there are prejudices that make it more difficult for women in a male-dominated environment. The fact that there are mainly (white) men at the top of business is not because men are better leaders – there is even research that provides hard figures to the contrary – but because they are more likely to be seen as such.

Joan C. Williams, a professor at the University of California who has done extensive research on workplace discrimination, calls this the prove it again -bias: women need to provide more evidence of competence to actually be seen as competent. A man running for leadership is given the benefit of the doubt, while a woman with identical experience is said to be “not quite ready yet.”

Shaky rope

Williams’ research confirms what other studies have already concluded: behavior that indicates leadership is less accepted from a woman than from a man. Williams calls this the tightrope -bias, to the precarious tightrope on which female leaders must balance. On the one hand, as leaders they must be decisive, decisive, visionary and assertive; on the other hand, they must be considerate and cooperative to be liked.

Two mechanisms are responsible for this. First of all, the human tendency to unconsciously expect groups that are lower in status to know their place, and thus to behave respectfully rather than dominantly. Hence the feedback to women that they should be more respectful.

Secondly, so-called prescriptive stereotypes play a role: norms that prescribe how women (and men) should behave. Recent research shows that these stereotypes have become stronger in recent decades, which may explain why Femke Halsema escaped the political arena in one piece, but Sigrid Kaag was chased away with tar and feathers.

Prejudices have cumulative effects

In business the tightrope perhaps less visible, but no less relevant. American researchers calculated the effect bias has on the position of women within a fictitious company, with 58 percent women at the bottom of the organization. Conclusion: prejudices have a cumulative effect. Even if only 1 percent of the difference in employee assessment is explained by prejudice, women have such a much smaller chance of promotion that the highest management level consists of only 35 percent women. In other words: a little bias has a big effect.

This is not insurmountable. Prejudices are often unconscious and automatic, but that does not mean that we have to passively watch as they maintain inequality between men and women. You can prevent gut feelings from taking over in countless ways, including by organizing business processes in such a way that prejudices no longer have a chance.

But it starts with realizing that these biases are there in the first place, in our brains and in our systems, as a result of centuries of history in which women were the second sex. So please, that debate. For politics, for business – for society as a whole.

Maartje Laterveer is a journalist, writer and consultant