WOMEN IN DESIGN: Women’s Tokenism, Part 1
**Be forewarned, this is a two-part article. The second installment will appear the week after next (thank final reviews and deadlines for the skipped week).**
I suppose I should start with a confession of sorts, so here goes. I leave the television on more than I should. In today’s world, with numerous shows on a plethora of channels, it’s so easy to find something I can have playing in the background while I work. And, because I flip between shows so often, it’s easy to see the patterns that emerge between just about every program. For example, there’s always at least one ‘token character’ in every show. You know how this works. Our world is incredibly diverse, and it’s great to see so many different people with different genders, races, religions, political views, or anything that makes people unique individuals. Our television shows tend to reflect this, and most programs have certain characters which fill certain roles. Sometimes it’s awesome and a great reflection of society, and all too often it seems forced and thus feels off because it does not accurately reflect reality. Maybe that’s why we notice it – if it doesn’t match the world we know, we quickly pick up on the differences and judge the show accordingly.
It’s sad when shows create a strict formula for diversity, instead of simply looking at the world and taking note of what’s there. But what I find even more uncomfortable is the fact that, in subtle ways, these television showsare occasionally reflecting reality. Think about a show full of strong male characters that has one woman thrown in the mix, maybe for diversity or perhaps for a storyline complication. This may seem unusual for many of our lives, as we live in a time where most careers and environments have a steady mix of men and women. But there are still those that do not. And in these situations, the person in the minority might have an unusual view of the situation.
For this topic, let’s say it’s game day at UT, and you’re a female student with strong school loyalty. Your male buddies have decided to get together and watch the game at someone’s apartment, and you were lucky enough to get invited. At this party, you’re just hanging out and cheering on your team with your buddies. You’re the cool person, just one of the guys. You’re special.
And that’s just it. You likely feel cool because you’re the only one. Sure it would be a fun party if the genders were nicely mixed, but you wouldn’t be so special. Maybe this gives you the tiniest sense of confidence and superiority (even if you don’t realize it at the time), and might even make you feel a little bit better than other women. But why were you invited? I mean, it’s obvious that you’re awesome, but are you there for the same reason there’s a woman in that one male-dominated television show? Are you there to show that these guys are diverse? I’d like to think that’s not the case. Though there are shallow people in this world, I doubt your presence at the party is purely to show diversity. You and your buddies are awesome, regardless of gender and unconscious thoughts. However, the little rush you get from being “just one of the guys” … well, that might be real.
This is called Tokenism, and this example specifically refers to Women’s Tokenism. It’s the idea that, just like on television shows, there needs to be diversity. But only the bare minimum, like a checklist. Two partners in the firm – check. One Revit wizard – check. One photoshop genius – check. One woman – check.
What does this mean? Does tokenism in the workplace even exist, or are there simply one or two instances that have been inflated to represent everything? How do we determine if this is an issue, and if it is, how do we solve it? You’ve read enough for this week, so we’ll continue discussing this the week after next. Until then, I encourage you to watch television and look at the world around you. Ponder these things and we’ll come back to them.
Good luck in this hectic time of the semester!