2020 panel - women and multi-cultural groups under represented

[moneymajix]

Businesswomen question 2020 panel mix

Updated 3 hours 8 minutes ago


Cate Blanchett is the only woman named as part of the 10-member panel that will choose people to attend the 2020 summit. (AFP: Timothy A Clary)


Actress Cate Blanchett is the only woman named as part of the Government-appointed 10-member panel that will choose people to attend the summit in April.

The chairwoman of Harris Farm Markets, Katherine Harris, says it is a lopsided board that will only be able to represent half of the population.

"It's not just that we're not getting different points of view but it's also that we're not getting role models," she said.

"All the young women coming out of school and at universities - they look up at this group of the supposedly 1,000 great thinkers in Australia and nine out of 10 of them are all men."

Ms Harris says she expected more from Mr Rudd.

"He's got his successful wife. He understands that most women are not actually at home looking after the grandchildren or the children, they've unfortunately got lots of other jobs as well. And this just ... is just such a shock."

Executive director of lobby group Women on Boards, Claire Braund, fears an under-representation of women on the summit leadership group will also lead to too many men and not enough women among the 1,000 summit delegates.

"This sends a message to young people, to future leaders that women are not equal, not good enough, not on our government's radar and not going to be considered," she said.

"I have to ask the question when I saw this list, why is it that the top 11 people, the first in the class, don't include at least one woman of substance in the areas of science, economics, health, rural affairs, governance, sustainability? Is there not one other woman with the qualifications and experience who can join Cate Blanchett and assume a leadership role in this important summit?

"How are we going to bring women, 51 per cent of the population, into this critical discussion that we're having about Australia's future?

The other 10 members are all men and from Anglo-Saxon backgrounds, apart from Aboriginal surgeon, Kelvin Kong.



http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/02/26/2172724.htm

 

[doctorj]

Why is the gender of this appointments committee important?
Surely the skills of those they appoint is more important than what is (or isn't) hanging between their legs?

Another media beat up. What happened to real journalism? Even 60 Minutes is full of celeb interviews these days.

 

[ZacR]

Businesswomen question 2020 panel mix

Updated 3 hours 8 minutes ago


Cate Blanchett is the only woman named as part of the 10-member panel that will choose people to attend the 2020 summit. (AFP: Timothy A Clary)


Actress Cate Blanchett is the only woman named as part of the Government-appointed 10-member panel that will choose people to attend the summit in April.

The chairwoman of Harris Farm Markets, Katherine Harris, says it is a lopsided board that will only be able to represent half of the population.

"It's not just that we're not getting different points of view but it's also that we're not getting role models," she said.

"All the young women coming out of school and at universities - they look up at this group of the supposedly 1,000 great thinkers in Australia and nine out of 10 of them are all men."

Ms Harris says she expected more from Mr Rudd.

"He's got his successful wife. He understands that most women are not actually at home looking after the grandchildren or the children, they've unfortunately got lots of other jobs as well. And this just ... is just such a shock."

Executive director of lobby group Women on Boards, Claire Braund, fears an under-representation of women on the summit leadership group will also lead to too many men and not enough women among the 1,000 summit delegates.

"This sends a message to young people, to future leaders that women are not equal, not good enough, not on our government's radar and not going to be considered," she said.

"I have to ask the question when I saw this list, why is it that the top 11 people, the first in the class, don't include at least one woman of substance in the areas of science, economics, health, rural affairs, governance, sustainability? Is there not one other woman with the qualifications and experience who can join Cate Blanchett and assume a leadership role in this important summit?

"How are we going to bring women, 51 per cent of the population, into this critical discussion that we're having about Australia's future?

The other 10 members are all men and from Anglo-Saxon backgrounds, apart from Aboriginal surgeon, Kelvin Kong.



http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/02/26/2172724.htm

I think Ms. Harris has made a very public error on this one.

For whatever reason she apparently thinks that women are as intelligent as men.

Obviously this is not true.

Now, don't get too excited - I wholeheartedly agree that women are EQUAL. However, they do not quite compare in the intelligence stakes.

Out of all the prominent inventors, pioneers, theorists etc etc - how many were female ?

Newton, Eintsein, Eddison, Gates, Buffett, Darwin, Adler, Strauss etc etc - where are the ladies among those names ??

*Ducks for cover*

 

[Sean K]

This is a serious conference, they're not talking about hairspray, or tampons.

Children make up about 30% of the population, I didn't hear them crying out.

I'm surprised gays and lesbians haven't demanded representation though. That's about 70% of the population right now.

Now, who else can I make angry....

Oh, those Muslims, how were they represented? We have the 'Anglican Everywhere' on the panel!!

Damn surprised the Australian of the Year hasn't been selected, we probably needed a theme song.

And where are The Wiggles!!!


Oh, hang on, there's going to be 100 on the panel. So, perhaps the balance will sort itself out.

Julia, Prospector and Grace for the panel!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[chops_a_must]

I guess without women there, it wont just be a talk/ bitch fest after all!

 

[moneymajix]

Hi Kennas

I hazard a guess that you make all the decisions in your household.


:nosympath:


Good luck, if it works for you and yours.

Not for everyone.

cheers


PS: Must be nice to be a white, anglo-saxon male (NOT)!

 

[moneymajix]

Doctor

Why is the gender of this appointments committee important?

Obviously the male ego at work.

"An analysis of some 30 studies by British researcher Adrian Furnham, a professor of psychology at University College London, shows that men and women are fairly equal overall in terms of IQ."

However, the researcher reports that the male ego is often larger than his actual IQ with men overestimating their IQ. Women tend to underplay their intelligence, while men overstate it.

 

[doctorj]

Obviously the male ego at work.

Obviously.

In case sarcasm isn't oozing out of your screen right now, do me a favour and pretend.

There's no causality in what you're suggesting and a group of only 10 people isn't significant enough to draw any conclusions from. I'd be very surprised if the gender spread in the larger group they appoint isn't more even.

 

[moneymajix]

Dear Doctor

Yes. Larger group likely to be more representative, one would hope. There would probably be a greater chance of that if the panel was more representative.


Talk to the females in your life (preferrably a cross section) and see if they think it is a media beatup or there is reason to be concerned about issues of inequality, discrimination etc.

Maybe they can enlighten you a tad.

:girl:

PS: I wonder how you would react if the panel consisted of one male!

 

[doctorj]

Talk to the females in your life (preferrably a cross section) and see if they think it is a media beatup

Isn't the selection of a group of people based on gender (to ensure an exactly even split, you'd need to select people with gender as a relevant input) nearly the exact definition of discrimination - the very thing you're claiming to be upset about?

or there is reason to be concerned about issues of inequality, discrimination etc.

Assuming the members of the committee were selected randomly from the Australian population and assuming that is made up of exactly 50/50 males and females, the probability that the committee was made up of half males and half females was LESS THAN 25%.

Could you then argue that a committee that ended up being half and half was evidence in itself of sexual descrimination?

 

[moneymajix]

Dear Doctor

You're not too scared to talk to those women?
I suspect you have an inkling as to what they might say!

I did not mention any set figures re the panel in terms of gender breakup:
50-50, 40-60 or whatever, as it is not of most importance.

The greater issue is inclusion of the talents of all types of Australians in the decision-making process. Kennas mentioned some of these groups in his post.

We are going to get a greater variety of questions and hopefuly better solutions, if a diversity of people are included in decsion-making.


Secondly, the inference one could make from the current composition of the panel is that women and people from ethnic groups make up less than ten pecent of Australia's best and brightest. I don't believe that for a second.


You can play around with figures, if you like. Maybe, that is something some men are inclined to do. It is very simplistic, imo. Maybe some women and men take into account other issues. Pretty insulting too, to those who make up those groups which would be over 50% of this society.



PS: Re your initial mention of the media.
There are very few worthwhile investigative journalists.
You have to search them out.
60 minutes - I would treat it and similar programs as entertainment or worse.

 

[doctorj]

The greater issue is inclusion of the talents of all types of Australians in the decision-making process. Kennas mentioned some of these groups in his post.

I hate to break it to you, Kennas was taking the p!ss. There is no greater issue here. You're making a mountain out of what is statistically a molehill. It'd be worth revisiting when the wider group is selected, but until then, it is meaningless.

Secondly, the inference one could make from the current composition of the panel is that women and people from ethnic groups make up less than ten pecent of Australia's best and brightest. I don't believe that for a second.

Just as well you don't believe it, because if you did, the inference would be quite flawed.

You can play around with figures, if you like. Maybe, that is something some men are inclined to do. It is very simplistic, imo. Maybe some women and men take into account other issues.

Yea, why ruin a good story with the truth

 

[moneymajix]

Dear Doctor,

I hate to break it to you, Kennas was taking the p!ss.

I know. Ironic, isn't it?

 

[moneymajix]

Dear Doctor

You're making a mountain out of what is statistically a molehill. It'd be worth revisiting when the wider group is selected, but until then, it is meaningless.

Molehill to you. Mountain to someone else.

If you can't become part of the decision-making process because you belong to a particular group, then how disempowering is that?


Do you think some of the old boys will be asking other old boys to join the larger group?


Who do these people know and mix with?


People tend to employ people who are LIKE THEM!
(see research in the area of Recruitment).



You focus on figures. I am focusing on equity and diversity.

 

[rub92me]

Dear girls and boys. I think everyone is jumping to conclusions a bit here. Reading the article it says the panel of 10 that will make the choice of 1,000 smarties has only one woman in it. Why would that mean that all the 9 man in that panel will only choose male smarty-pants and Cate will choose only female smarty-panties?
On another note I think they're going to struggle to find 1,000 really smart people in the whole of Australia anyway, but that's another topic :
On another note again: Irony is more a male thing apparently. Someone did a study on it; a humourless woman.

 

[Julia]

If we consider the proportion of women in leading positions in Australia, whether political, business, academe etc., then the ratio of 1 in 10 as with this panel is probably more or less representative.

I heard Ms Harris with this comment on 'PM' this evening and my only thought was "I wonder what especially qualifies Cate Blanchett as an actor to be on such an august panel?" The gender balance didn't cross my mind.

 

[chops_a_must]

You can play around with figures, if you like. Maybe, that is something some men are inclined to do. It is very simplistic, imo. Maybe some women and men take into account other issues. Pretty insulting too, to those who make up those groups which would be over 50% of this society.

Way to shoot your own argument in the foot...

I love the way minority groups... and in particular feminists, put forth the notion that issues from a certain group, can only be represented by that particular group.

Rather sexist and discriminatory wouldn't you think?

Believing that males cannot present female issues, or vice versa, is inherently sexist. And it may have precluded the fact that a lot of men actually are true feminists. (I'd say there is more of them these days then actual female feminists fwiw.)

 

[dhukka]

I heard Ms Harris with this comment on 'PM' this evening and my only thought was "I wonder what especially qualifies Cate Blanchett as an actor to be on such an august panel?" The gender balance didn't cross my mind.

That was my thought as well. She's an actress for Christs sake, what the hell is she doing on there? Why don't they just yank 10 people off the street and ask them?

 

[moneymajix]

Chops

I love the way minority groups... and in particular feminists, put forth the notion that issues from a certain group, can only be represented by that particular group.

Fine. Let's change the panel to all female with a token male.


:badass:

I guess without women there, it wont just be a talk/ bitch fest after all!

Btw, would you mention the the comments in your first post on this thread to your grandmother, mother, wife, sister, daughter (assuming you are a male)?
Issues?


Dismayed.

Not a lot of love in the room.

 

[doctorj]

I love the way minority groups... and in particular feminists, put forth the notion that issues from a certain group, can only be represented by that particular group.

All men are inherently sexist, didn't you take high school English?