The historical undervaluation of women's work, rooted in systemic biases and male-centric workplace norms, continues to impact women's economic and occupational health.

The historical disregard and undervaluation of women's work, both in terms of remuneration and recognition, have a profound impact on women's lives today, affecting various facets of women's experiences in the workforce. In 1975, 90% of Icelandic women demonstrated a powerful protest, refusing to engage in any work, paid or unpaid, highlighting their economic dependence and lack of political influence. This strike served as a catalyst for gender equality policies in Iceland. The terms "housewife" or "working woman" misrepresent reality, as women universally undertake a significant share of unpaid domestic and care work, limiting their availability for paid work. Despite more women joining the workforce, men haven’t reciprocated by assuming corresponding amounts of unpaid work at home. Contemporary workplace dynamics and worker definitions are often built around a male-centric model, ignoring women's domestic responsibilities and realities. Workplaces generally lack family-friendly policies, like affordable childcare, compelling many women to reduce their paid working hours, leading to diminished wages and advancement opportunities. The purported meritocracy in workplaces is a façade, concealing systemic biases against women in hiring, promotion, and pay. Data illustrates that women face systemic disparities in many fields, despite possessing comparable qualifications. For example, the introduction of blind auditions in orchestras led to more women being hired, showcasing the prevalent biases. Moreover there’s a conspicuous lack of research on women's occupational health and safety. Predominantly male-centric standards and regulations leave women in industries like healthcare and cleaning inadequately researched and protected. The scarcity of data on women's work exposures is leading to increased injuries, stress, and illnesses among working women. Unstable work environments, like gig jobs and zero-hour contracts, exploit loopholes in labor laws, disproportionately affecting women, rendering them more susceptible to discrimination and sexual harassment. The advent of just-in-time scheduling algorithms disrupts the balance between paid work and unpaid care work for numerous women. And even worse, the issue of violence and harassment that women face at work is often under-reported and neglected by employers. The prevalent abuse faced by professions like nursing is usually disregarded due to the predominantly male leadership in many sectors. To value women's labor and lives equally, fundamental alterations to workplace regulations, equipment, and culture are imperative.

The medical world's male-centric bias has led to significant gaps in understanding and treating women's health issues.

Let's talk about how the medical world has traditionally seen the male body as the norm, which has led to women being misdiagnosed and improperly treated. Firstly, it's important to understand that medical education and textbooks still consider the male body as the standard, while women are seen as deviations from this norm. This is a hangover from historical views that saw women's bodies as inferior. The result? There are huge gaps in our understanding of female physiology. Moving on, there's a significant lack of representation of women in medical research. This includes clinical trials, animal studies, and even cell research. Despite legal requirements to include women, these mandates are often overlooked. The consequence is that treatments and technologies are developed that don't work as effectively for women. For instance, heart disease in women is often missed because their symptoms are different from men's. Similarly, medications are dosed as if women are just smaller versions of men. Furthermore, women's pain and health issues are often brushed aside by doctors as being all in their heads or emotional. When women report pain, they wait longer for treatment and are more likely to be given sedatives rather than pain medication. Diseases like endometriosis, which predominantly affect women, are overlooked and under-researched. There's also the issue of overprescribing antidepressants to women. It seems that some women who show physical symptoms are being labeled as depressed. Moreover, mental health diagnoses like autism and ADHD, which were developed around male behaviors, mean that women are often underdiagnosed. The crux of the matter is that medical knowledge often equates maleness with universality. This failure to account for women's differing immune systems, hormones, and symptoms can have life-threatening consequences. What's needed is research that focuses specifically on women's health issues that have traditionally been ignored. For example, problems with male erections have been thoroughly researched, leading to the swift approval of Viagra; however, there remains a notable lack of investment in addressing menstrual pain. The bottom line is that medicine needs to change fundamentally to represent female bodies, lives, and needs equally.

Products and systems are often designed with a male-centric focus, overlooking the specific needs and experiences of women across various industries.

Many products, tools, and systems are unintentionally designed with male needs as the default, often disregarding the needs and preferences of female users. This oversight manifests in various industries, producing unfavorable consequences for women. For instance, within the tech world, a slew of products has been developed with minimal input from prospective female users. A striking example is the original version of the Apple Health app, which surprisingly lacked a period tracker, a crucial feature for a health platform catering to everyone. Similarly, voice recognition systems like Siri and other AI assistants, formulated on datasets dominated by male voices, exhibit difficulty comprehending female tones. Women using VR headsets report higher incidences of motion sickness due to unaddressed differences in visual processing between the sexes. Even the commonplace calorie counters on exercise machines operate on metrics related to male height, weight, and metabolism. In the realm of medical devices, there’s a significant lack of consideration for women's anatomy and health. Tania Boler, when designing a pelvic floor trainer, encountered a stark absence of data on vaginal dimensions making the product development based on data more difficult. In terms of everyday items, a glaring discrepancy exists as well. Standard keyboard and smartphone sizes pose challenges to female pianists and users who typically have smaller hands. The notion of "one-size-fits-men" is prevalent, ignoring the average hand size differences of 1-1.5 inches between the sexes. Another severe illustration of this discrepancy is found in car safety design, where crash test dummies have historically been modeled after the average male. This oversight neglects the unique body mechanics and seated postures of women, elevating their risk of injuries and fatalities in automobile accidents significantly. Even in developmental projects, women's labor and requirements are frequently undervalued. The introduction of plough-based agriculture has particularly disadvantaged women, hampering their ability to balance agricultural duties with childcare, unlike more versatile hand tillage methods. Designers of improved stoves, intended to mitigate indoor air pollution, often overlook the input of female end users, leading to implementations that inadvertently complicate women’s lives. In many instances, projects erroneously deem women’s labor as secondary, concentrating predominantly on male-centric income generation activities, leaving women’s roles in agriculture largely undocumented and undervalued. This pervasive male-centric bias stems from the extensive exclusion of women's insights and experiences, affecting a range of products—from high-value tech innovations to critical automobile designs. Including women equally in all phases of research, design, and testing would undeniably enhance outcomes. While advocacy has spearheaded some improvements, substantial disparities continue to exist, posing detrimental risks to female users across diverse domains. It’s crucial to prioritize diversity and bridge the longstanding data gaps concerning women’s needs and experiences to create more inclusive and equitable products and systems.

The systemic gender data gap in public life and government, resulting from women's exclusion, leads to biased policies and economic miscalculations, necessitating a shift towards inclusive, evidence-based systems.

The gender data gap in public life and government can lead to policies that are not only ineffective but also biased, causing harm to women. One of the key issues is how we measure our economy. The Gross Domestic Product (GDP) is the main economic metric, but it doesn't account for unpaid domestic and care work. This type of work is mostly done by women, so by not including it in our economic measurements, we're overlooking a significant contribution to the economy. This oversight can lead governments to underestimate the impact of austerity cuts, which often result in more unpaid work for women. It also means we're underestimating the potential economic gains from policies that support women's paid employment. While we don't have enough data that's broken down by sex, some estimates suggest that unpaid work could make up 50-80% of GDP in some countries. This data gap can skew government policy and spending decisions. Our tax systems also often discriminate against women. This is because they're not designed with gender in mind. For example, joint tax returns can penalize secondary earners, who are usually women. Tax credits and deductions often favor traditional gender roles, and consumption taxes can disproportionately affect women, who tend to spend more on household essentials. Unfortunately, we don't collect much data on the impact of taxes on different genders. Some countries in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) have started to analyze the impact of budgets by gender, but most only focus on spending, not revenue. As a result, our global tax systems can drive gender inequality because they're not designed with gender in mind. There's also a significant gender data gap in political representation. Research shows that women legislators tend to prioritize "women's issues" and policies that support women and families. However, most governments around the world are still dominated by men, with women making up less than 25% of parliamentarians globally. Some countries have managed to increase women's representation dramatically by using different electoral systems and gender quotas. But women in politics often face psychological warfare from their male colleagues, including sexist remarks, harassment, threats, and even violence. This hostile environment can discourage women from entering politics and reduce their effectiveness once they're elected, which further perpetuates the gender data gap at the top. The lack of women in leadership roles leads to a gender data gap, which in turn results in systems and policies that are biased towards men. Our political and economic metrics and structures were created based on male-default thinking, not impartial "common sense". To fix this imbalance, we need systems that are inclusive and based on evidence. We need to address the root causes of women’s exclusion across public life to eliminate the gender data gap. In conclusion, the exclusion and mistreatment of women in public life, government, and positions of power have resulted in a systemic gender data gap. This gap leads to policies that are ineffective and unjust, affecting economic issues like budgets, taxes, and spending priorities, as well as social policies. To create more equitable and effective governance for all, we need to address the root causes of women’s under-representation across public life through inclusive, evidence-based systems.

Gender data gaps in crisis situations lead to inefficient, prejudiced disaster responses that exacerbate women's vulnerability and perpetuate gender inequality.

Unfortunately gender data gaps become amplified in times of crisis, such as war, natural disasters, or pandemics. The omission of women's viewpoints and necessities results in inefficient and prejudiced disaster response and recovery initiatives. Starting off, it's important to understand how the reconstruction efforts after a disaster often disregard women's daily experiences, leading to illogical results like houses being rebuilt without kitchens. This happens because disaster planning is predominantly controlled by men, who tend to overlook aspects like childcare, healthcare, informal work, and social connections, which are integral to women's lives. Moving on to conflict situations, it's noteworthy that despite United Nations resolutions, women continue to be underrepresented in peace negotiations. This is a significant issue because studies have shown that the inclusion of women increases the likelihood of achieving and maintaining peace agreements. Women also bring to the table important issues that are often overlooked by male elites. However, cultural sensitivities are frequently used as a pretext to exclude women from these discussions. Next, we delve into the disproportionate impacts that disasters have on women. Women are subjected to increased domestic violence, reduced access to healthcare, greater economic vulnerability, and higher mortality rates. In the chaotic aftermath of disasters, girls are married off at a younger age and women face increased violence. Indirect fatalities due to lack of maternal care and infectious diseases also rise among women. Highlighting the shortcomings of disaster responses, it's clear that male-biased approaches fail to address women's specific needs, ranging from healthcare to sanitation. Relief efforts distribute resources without taking into account the number of women or cultural restrictions. Shelters and refugee camps are not designed with women's safety and security in mind. Men often exploit the power imbalances in aid distribution to sexually coerce women in desperate situations. Lastly, it's crucial to understand how data gaps on issues like sexual violence are worsened during crises. Male-dominated systems often deny the existence of problems despite reports of abuse, citing a lack of "proof". Women's unpaid work in disaster relief also goes unrecorded, even though studies indicate that women play a significant role in organizing community efforts. In conclusion, it's evident that the exclusion of women and the disregard for their perspectives in disaster response perpetuates gender inequality. Recognizing and addressing women's lives and needs is crucial for effective relief and rebuilding efforts. It's critical to close gender data gaps during crises, as disasters amplify women's vulnerability. The evidence strongly suggests that male-biased systems fail women when they are most in need during catastrophic events.

Home

Invisible Women - Book Summary (2024)

Caroline Criado Perez

"Invisible Women" is a book that explores the systemic gender bias in data collection and analysis, highlighting how this bias impacts women's lives in various sectors such as healthcare, technology, and urban planning.

Key Ideas

Let's explore the issue of unintentional gender bias in the design of public spaces and infrastructure. Urban planning, often reflecting the experiences of male decision-makers, frequently neglects the unique needs of women, leading to cities that are not as fair as they could be. The predominantly male perspective results in a focus on commuting from home to the work with a car over the "trip-chaining" travel patterns, for example from home to the groceries store, to work, to kindergarden, more common among women.

One example where this can be observed is the prioritization of snow clearing. Traditionally, the focus has been on clearing roads for cars before sidewalks for pedestrians and cyclists. However, since women are more likely to use public transit and active transport, such as walking or cycling, they experienced a higher accident rate in winter, attributed predominantly to the precarious conditions of slippery sidewalks, compared to men. A shift in priorities to clear sidewalks first has proven to be more beneficial for women in Swedish cities like Karlskoga. This change not only caters to women's travel needs but also reduces weather-related injuries and healthcare costs.

Another example is the issue of public bathrooms. Bathrooms that allocate equal floor space for men and women may seem fair, but they overlook the differences in biology and toilet needs. Women often face longer wait times, a problem that is worsened when stalls are converted to "gender-neutral" without increasing capacity. The lack of adequate public toilet facilities also disproportionately affects women in poorer countries, leading to safety and health concerns.

In conclusion, more inclusive practices in urban planning based on women's data could improve equity, safety, health, and economic outcomes.

"Invisible Women" by Caroline Criado Perez is a groundbreaking book that exposes the gender data gap - a gap in our knowledge that is at the root of perpetual, systemic discrimination against women. The book reveals how, in a world largely built for and by men, we are systematically ignoring half the population. It exposes the gender data bias that affects women's lives in areas such as healthcare, technology, workplaces, and urban planning.

10 Actions to Implement Learnings:

Acknowledge the Gender Data Gap: Recognize that there is a gender data gap and that it affects women's lives in many ways. This is the first step towards addressing the issue.
Educate Yourself and Others: Share the knowledge you've gained from the book with others. Discuss the gender data gap in your social and professional circles to raise awareness.
Promote Gender Equality in Your Environment: Advocate for gender equality in your workplace, school, or community. This could involve pushing for equal representation in decision-making roles or advocating for policies that address gender bias.
Support Women in STEM: Encourage and support women and girls who are interested in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields. These fields are often male-dominated and can contribute to the gender data gap.
Question Data and Research: When you come across research or data, question whether it takes gender into account. If it doesn't, consider how this might affect the results and conclusions.
Advocate for More Inclusive Research: Push for research and data collection that includes women and takes gender differences into account. This could involve advocating for more funding for such research or supporting organizations that conduct it.
Support Policies that Address the Gender Data Gap: Vote for and support policies and politicians that acknowledge and aim to address the gender data gap.
Use Gender-Inclusive Language: Be mindful of the language you use. Using gender-inclusive language can help challenge and change harmful stereotypes.
Challenge Gender Stereotypes: Challenge gender stereotypes when you see them, whether they're in the media, in your workplace, or in your personal life.
Support Women's Rights Organizations: Support organizations that fight for women's rights and gender equality. This could involve donating money, volunteering your time, or using your platform to raise awareness about their work.