Issues: Samarasekera Response Team Putting the 'boy crisis' in context

Issues: Samarasekera Response Team

Putting the 'boy crisis' in context

Derek Warick / warwick.derek@gmail.com

Since the middle of October, my life has been consumed by an article in a local newspaper and some comments in it put forward by University of Alberta President Indira Samarasekera. The article in question addressed the post-secondary gender gap—the fact that women's enrolment in post-secondary institutions is increasing at a higher rate than men's. Those concerned about this trend typically slip into the claim that feminism has gone too far, that we're now facing a "feminization" of education and boys are being left behind in grade school.

I sat, bewildered as I read the article and Samarasekera's expression of concern that we won't have enough male CEOs in 20 years. And that she's going to be an advocate for white men. And that no one is going to question her.

If Samarasekera's words were taken out of context or she had been misrepresented—as some of us had hoped—then she had a responsibility to make that known. She didn't. Enter the Samarasekera Response Team.

The Samarasekera Response Team (SRT) is the name some friends and I eventually went by in the process of launching a campus poster campaign addressing her comments and the general fear-mongering generated in the article. Her comments and the ideas presented in the article were so public that it was only fair that our action be just as visible. That, and the fact that this action was bigger than Samarasekera; it was addressing the general ill-thought that prevents a reasonable analysis of the so-called "boy crisis."

It is true: women's enrolment numbers are increasing at a faster rate than that of men. According to Statistics Canada, women make up roughly 58 percent of students in universities across Canada. Here's where men's rights activists and university presidents come in saying, essentially, "Great job feminism! Now you and your angry compatriots can retire early—here's proof that equality has been achieved, so can't we all move on already?" Many of these same people become upset when we tell them there are other issues that aren't being addressed, to which they respond that feminists are just selfish, and that it isn't about equality anymore; feminism is now about dominating men. (When it's a man putting forward feminist arguments it forces them to get a bit more creative.)

It's easy to forget in the midst of all this concern for men in the education system that when women began seeking to increase their post-secondary participation rates, education was a means to an end—namely the end of wage discrimination and the ability to lead lives independent from men. Women are doing what they can to achieve these goals—like enrolling in universities in higher numbers—but to no avail. The wage gap between women and men with a university education in 1991 was down to 12 percent. By 2001, it had grown to 18 percent. For women of colour, it's even worse: with a post-secondary education, they make just 55 cents to a university-educated man's dollar. Women of colour without a university education will make 65 cents to a comparable man's dollar.

Combine this with the very real fact that women are often sexually harassed in the workplace and are less likely to be hired or be given promotions, and suddenly the absurdity of the claim that women will be ahead of men in the workplace in 20 years is revealed.

Now, Samarasekera's original vow (she's since clarified her position in a letter to the editor) to be an advocate for white men is another issue. The original claim was a racist one, plain and simple. It decontextualized the issue of male enrolment in universities to the point that racialized and classed peoples were effectively erased. Male enrolment is an issue, yes, but it's not limited to white men, whose enrolment is second only to white women.

The context is slightly different, but statistics from the US Department of Education indicate that among white, black and Hispanic people, women's rates of enrolment are increasing at higher rates. Across every race, men's enrolment is lagging behind women's; this problem isn't limited to white men, and in fact it's worse for people of colour, whose enrolment numbers are lower in general. In fact, Hispanic men's rates of enrolment are the only ones that have decreased. Unfortunately the statistics don't go into economics, but the study indicates clearly that meaningful discussion around this issue cannot be divorced from race and class.

What the SRT wanted to achieve with this action was to address these issues publicly, to generate discussion around them and to hold our president accountable for her comments. In almost every facet, we think we've succeeded. Despite having been conceived and developed in someone's living room, word of our campaign has spread nationally. Professors are discussing it with their students in classrooms. We've added to the barely audible feminist voice in Alberta. These are important accomplishments, but we need to be sure we don't lose this ground; we need to keep these issues in public discourse. That need is even stronger in our current political climate, in which Prime Minister Harper assures us women have achieved equality.

We need to move further, push harder, be louder and put these concerns on the political agenda. We, the SRT, have kick-started what should be the real concerns: the ongoing sexism women face in the workplace, the race- and class-based barriers both women and men must confront when seeking a post-secondary education and the continued marginalization they face upon graduation. The solutions are out there: national, publicly funded child care, pay equity laws, more effective initiatives to end violence against women. It's up to us to make these solutions realities. V

Derek Warwick is a women's studies major at the University of Alberta and a member of the Samarasekera Response Team.