My bias was intentional. In my last post, Girl Power, I highlighted two things:

1. The Girl Effect video

2. Women who are Inspirational Educational Leaders

Liz B. Davis said this in the first comment on the post: (I added the links)

David,
Thanks for including me in your list of inspiring women. I am honored to be included among so many great women. I also find Kim, Vicki and Sue to be important members of my learning network. Thanks also for introducing me to Heidi.

Now to stir the pot just a bit… I have been included in other lists of inspiring WOMEN and, while I am happy and honored to be recognized (especially by you since I respect you a great deal), there is also something just a tad condescending about qualifying the list by gender. What if it had been about the top black or Jewish or gay educators to follow? …

And, as she often does, Liz got me thinking! In response I commented and then Liz added (among other things):

When showcasing women, is it necessary to point out they are women? It might be just as powerful to talk about us as people and about the qualities you admire. I’m sure your readers would notice that you had only chosen women without you pointing it out.

What’s interesting about this is that I was very intentional with my wording. I used the term ‘girl’ just twice: In the title and to tie things up at the end of the post in reference to the video, ‘The Girl Effect’… beyond that I used the term Woman. Furthermore, in my introduction to these women, I said this: “So here are a few real educational leaders worth watching, and more specifically reading:” … Intentionally choosing not to reference them as being female.

But is that enough? Liz’s questions and comments are valid and worth reflecting on!

Well, I’ve reflected.

If I was writing a post specifically about educational leaders, then I’d have to agree with Liz wholeheartedly. Imagine me saying ‘here are my favourite educational leaders’ and then having two lists, one for women and one for men… personally I’d find that more than a bit condescending! However my last post was about the power of women to change the world. It was about the fact that not enough attention is paid to women;  not enough women are recognized for their accomplishments; and there are not enough significant role models for my daughters. In this context my belief is that a list of inspirational female leaders is appropriate.

But an appropriate list is one thing, and a necessary list is another. Why do we need another list of inspirational females?

…Because of unintentional bias!

From my own reading and personal experience, this is what I know:

* I read an article years ago that said women are far more likely to be cut off/interrupted when talking in a meeting than men are. Since then I’ve seen this time and again in meetings. I’ve even caught myself doing it.

* A few years ago I read Malcolm Gladwell’s Blink: The Power of Thinking Without Thinking. In the section about auditioning for musical orchestras, the number of women hired dramatically increased after screens were used to conceal the sex of the person auditioning.

* Last year I went to BLC08 with three male keynote speakers. This year I’m going back for BLC09, and what do I see? Three male keynotes.

* My kids loved Dora the Explorer. This is a great cartoon with a female hero. Dora relies on two animated objects: a map and a backpack. The male map always knows where to go and points the way for Dora. The female backpack always needs ‘your help’ to figure out what item in the backpack Dora needs.

I don’t think any of these things are intentional, but they are there… Subtle, but there.

I wish these unintentional biases were not around for my daughters to be exposed to. I wish these were not hidden behind more blatant biases that modern media exposes our kids to.  I don’t want ‘separate but equal‘ for my girls. But I also don’t want to pretend that the biases aren’t there, or think that they will go away if we just pretend they aren’t there.

If we are going to unintentionally shut women up, leave them out and give them submissive roles, then shouldn’t we intentionally and necessarily take notice of them when it is appropriate to do so?