The following is an extract from a Big Ideas keynote speech delivered Sunday night at the Melbourne Writers Festival …
After the announcement of the 2011 Miles Franklin shortlist, Alison Croggon wrote on The Drum: “A world loaded in favour of one s-x accounts for the pyramidal structure of gender. At the wide bottom of the writing world — the world of amateur writers on the internet, for instance — women, if anything, dominate. The closer you get to the top, the fewer women there are. And at the very top, as in this year’s Miles Franklin, the presence of women is an exception.”
What to do about it? One thing is certain: passively assuming women are equal and will gradually work their way to equal status doesn’t work. We need some different tools.
I agree with Croggon that the issues surrounding the economic and cultural rights of women are not being resolved by the free market. So, what are these different tools to be?
Well some of the new tools are old tools. There is more talk and there has been a real flourishing of more grassroots action going on in my town of Melbourne, for example. There are feminist salons being held in pubs in Collingwood and a regular event called Women of Letters held at town halls around the place. Recently, there was Slutwalk. A group of us have set up a committee to establish a prize to award women writers. These sound like small things but the number of “small” gestures are increasing at a rate that suggests a real momentum again is developing in the woman’s movement.
The prize that we’re striving to establish — we’re calling ourselves The Stellas — have received much support but there is no doubt that some people find the idea of affirmative action — though we think of it more as celebration — as patronising. I do understand this resistance. Being angry about the inequality that exists is distracting and demoralising. We all spend much of our lives trying not to dwell on such things. Also, we in the arts community like to think we’re above all that. But putting our head in the sand isn’t going to change things. Anne Summers again . “A lot of people are worried about quotas. Especially women. I hear many women say they want to ‘get there on merit’. The trouble is, we do not have a merit-based system in this country. People are promoted for all sorts of reasons — networks, connections (old school tie, golf buddies), competence, luck, nepotism and so on.”
I find it interesting that people who would argue (correctly) that you can’t deny climate change because we have a few cool days in a row, or it’s been raining in Victoria this year — that is, who argue you have to look at long-term trends — are more than happy to say that it’s just been a bad year for women’s writing or women’s theatre. You can argue the toss about any given year; you can’t argue with decades of systematic exclusion.
We need to find new ways to advocate for women’s voices, in the face of their ongoing marginalisation, both cultural and economic. We need to ignore the inevitable suggestions that to advocate in this way is tokenism, “s-xist”, “unfair” or unnecessary. I want to return to Greer’s quote “The sight of women talking together has always made men uneasy”.
It’s worth noting that in the corporate world the pressure is being put on companies to lift their game. All ASX (Australian Security Exchange) companies now have to report annually on the gender breakdown of their workforces, and specifically on senior management and board composition. They are not having to do so to answer to any particular quota — but they do need to make their decisions visible and even that seems to have a very positive affect on behaviours. We at the Stella hope that simply by having raised some of the issues we have regarding women and writing that literary editors, and publishers, and judges are pausing for thought.
But obviously simply talking isn’t enough. I think that factors such as gender need to be consciously taken into account in judging, awarding grants, or interviewing for jobs. When I’ve worked as a peer of the literature board of the Australia Council, or been on judging panels, I do think about gender, ethnicity — whether Tasmania is there, whether there are enough poets — all these things. We have to. It’s part of the job. And I don’t mean by that you automatically give prizes or money to work you don’t think is worthy — but you do adjust for your blind spots. To be honest, my blind spot when it came to fiction I chose to publish at Meanjin, the literary journal I edited for three years, was men. I had to autocorrect to make sure that men were getting a fair go, given I tended to gravitate towards the work of women. And I didn’t have a problem with doing that.
However, change is not as simple as introducing quotas and passing laws. You can make it illegal for women to be beaten. You can make it illegal for them to be r-ped. But legislation can’t force men — or indeed women — to find the style in which women write, or paint, or sing more gripping or important. It can’t insist that women become more confident and assertive. You could also argue, to quote Alison Croggon again, that quotas “provide a simple answer that evades the real work.” … [which is] changing the complex of ideologies that situates the white, abled, middle-class male subject as the normative consciousness, and that constitutes anyone else as other. She identifies that work as consciousness raising and ongoing conversation. Again, I would agree with her.
An incident last week involving 2GB broadcaster Alan Jones heckling Sydney Morning Herald journalist Jacqueline Maley at the Convoy of No Confidence rally is just the latest example of a culture in which women are bullied into invisibility.
Leaders in this country are actively cultivating a climate in which women are bullied into disappearing — even further — from our culture’s public spaces. We need to become more visible and indeed women are beginning, again, to react in more public ways to their ongoing disconnection from culture, and from economic power. A new wave, a fourth wave, if you will, of feminism is needed and soon to arrive.
*Sophie Cunningham is an author, editor and co-founder of the Stella Awards
Yes..but the sight of men talking together, at least if its a business club with exclusively male membership, is not just discomforting its illegal. If you think that a ‘new wave’ of femminism is served by a prize which will be won by woman because it is, by definition, a competition among women then go for it. Sounds pretty 1970s to me, and I’m just too old to do the 80s again. I think the federal parliament, the heads of APS departments, senior membership in the professions are really pretty merit based and women seem to be doing pretty well. So, digging myself firmly into the I-never-want-to-go-back-to-identity-politics-again camp, perhaps an approrach to improving women in the publishing industry would be to write something everyone wants to read. JK Rowling did it.
“We need to find new ways to advocate for women’s voices”
I think this is unnecessary, I believe the reason women are becoming marginalised is a lot more to do with women’s own preference for private lives than any inbuilt discrimination. An example of this is to look at the number of small businesses owned and operated by women. It’s a narrow view that only identifies ASX listed boards as a target. In the wide marketplace both male and female writers fail or succeed not because of discrimination but because of talent, and the sex of the author doesnt appear to have much to do with the likelyhood of creating a successful work. Feminism is a bit old hat anyway given that the goals are much achieved despite feminists continuing to campaign for things that have already been attained. A great example of this is pay equality –
According to wikipedia : “Under Australia’s old centralised wage fixing system, “equal pay for work of equal value” by women was introduced in 1969. Anti-discrimination on the basis of sex was legislated in 1984″. Early feminists (19th century) campaigned to get women’s lives and health improved so they could be offered more than the bleak options of barwork, maid, nurse or prostitute. They had a point! Arguing for a campaign to make women successful writers by the articles author is just fey. There are much more worthy causes in this modern era.
Altakoi, it’s really not as simple as women ‘writing something everyone wants to read’. I wonder how many people would have read a book series about a girl witch called Hermione, written by Joanne Rowling.
As Sophie says above, part of the problem is that many people (both men and women) internalise the idea that culture made by women isn’t as interesting or important. Author MJ Hyland thinks women should “Shut up, get on with it. Write.” Yet she refuses even to own her own name, because “Maria Hyland sounds like a florist; I wouldn’t read a book by somebody called Maria Hyland and I just thought M. J. Hyland sounded better.”
It sounds ‘better’ because a sexist culture tells us it does, not because it actually is better.
@Altakoi It’s true that JK Rowling wrote a book that appeals to everyone. But it’s “JK” not “Joanne” on the cover because they feared boys wouldn’t read books written by a female.
Joanne’s spoken about it in interviews before: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jcKZxv-hNoU
Does Alice Munro have this problem?