#InternationalWomansDay how to measure gender equality?

This is a very short blog - because I am not an expert here in any way and do not claim to be.

However I have a daughter and two grand daughters - and I have common-sense. Of course I want them to feel and be equal with men - to not be held back by gender prejudice in any way. 

Women have not been treated equally. They have fought a long and hard battle. 

However in the UK (unlike many other countries - especially countries dominated by religion) women are now equal under the law. Our law is not gender biased and of course rightly so. It was indefensible when it was.

But the battle for many women still goes on. Why?

Well it seems mainly because many women focus on "equality of outcomes". ie gender pay gap - the number of women in senior FTSE roles etc etc. I was listening to a woman explaining why this is entirely the wrong approach for women to adopt because it assumes women have the same objectives as men - want the same outcomes. She felt this attitude just in itself actually demeans women - ie to ape men.

What she explained is what women should really be focused on is "equality of opportunity". If a women chooses a corporate life her progress to the top should be based on her performance and not be held back because of gender. But the measure of this should not be there is 50 50 gender parity in FTSE boardrooms because a higher proportion of men than women may seek a corporate life. Women might want to choose to do other things.

She went onto to say focusing on equality of outcomes very often leads to thinking social engineering is required (or justified) - so women only short lists and gender based targets etc. She felt this was discriminatory behaviour and hard to justify. In fact she said it did woman no favours to be given promotion just because she was a woman.

I thought this was an interesting point of view and makes sense to me. 

I think it undermines any campaign where disparity in equality of outcome is used as evidence of discriminatory behaviour when in fact differences in outcome arise for other other reasons - like individuals exercising personal choice..

On a slightly different theme I read an article about gender parity in sports prize money. In many sports it has been achieved - others lag behind. Football for instance - there remains a big gap - where in tennis for instance it is equal. Some people argue that the prize money gap is evidence of discriminatory behaviour towards women. However what they are unwilling to acknowledge is there is a commercial reality here. If gate receipts, endorsements and TV money is the same for men's and woman's matches then of course prize money should be the same. When it is not - as it is not in football - then is it not reasonable that this should be reflected in the reward to the participants?