Why a gender lens is necessary to create an equal world EXEMPLAR
Topic: Gender
by Yasmin, 2020 Cohort
Gender equality is based on a simple idea- a world where all genders are treated the same. But how can this actually be
There are two ways to view gender equality: formal or substantive.
Formal equality advocates for the identical treatment of men and women. In Australia, all genders have the ability to run for politics, enter the workforce or buy property. These freedoms suggest that men and women have equal access to opportunity should they wish to pursue it.
However, substantive equality acknowledges that men and women are different. Men hold the balance of power in society and institutions often perpetuate masculine norms and assumptions. Formal equality operates on the assumption that men and women can be treated the same. In reality, gender blind policies are unlikely to produce equal outcomes because they does not address women’s underlying disadvantage.
A gender lens demonstrates how to apply substantive equality in practice. It asks 3 questions:
-
Gender sensitivity: Will this measure impact men and women differently because of their different needs?
-
Gender exploitation: Does this measure perpetuate harmful gender stereotypes?
-
Gender inequity: Does this measure contribute to gender equality because it does not recognise the historical, structural and social barriers that prevent women and men from operating on the same playing field?
A gender lens can be applied to Australia’s stay at home orders during COVID-19. This policy appears to affect all genders equally, yet has disproportionately impacted women. Before COVID-19, the average Australian woman already performed almost double the amount of time on unpaid care duties compared to men. School closures and working from home have further increased these pressures and places women at higher risk of losing employment and financial independence. Stay at home orders have also seen a surge in domestic violence cases, with the majority of survivors being female. Australia’s ‘gender-blind’ approach to COVID-19 has produced deeply gendered effects.
A gender lens would have allowed decision-makers to anticipate and address this gender inequality. The government could have established a gender responsive budget during the crisis, which measures COVID-19’s economic impact on both formal and unpaid work. This allows policymakers to better understand how women’s caring duties impacts employment, which justifies measures such as free childcare. The government also could have predicted an increase in gender-based violence, given that one in four Australian women have been abused by a partner. The government should have pre-emptively funded additional domestic violence emergency accommodation and provided a clear exit strategy for survivors who need to leave an abusive environment during lockdown.
Despite its benefits, a gender lens is imperfect. It is only effective if women are included in decision-making, as a male perspective cannot truly capture the nuances of the female lived experience. A gender lens also does not exhaustively cover diversity; it does not consider non-binary individuals or factors such as race, class and age. It should be one of many lenses applied. Nevertheless, its existence is important. For Australia to be substantively gender equal, it must unmask its gendered reality.
Disclaimer#
This content has been contributed by a student as part of a learning activity.
If there are inaccuracies, or opportunities for significant improvement on this topic, feedback is welcome on how to improve the resource.
You can improve articles on this topic as a student in "Unravelling Complexity", or by including the amendments in an email to: Chris.Browne@anu.edu.au