Are we there yet?

Last year in Victoria alone, more than 61,000 incidences of family violence were reported. 

Professor Cathy Humphreys of the Department of Social Work researches family and domestic violence. She says there is a clear relationship between gender equity and more respectful relationships between men and women. The more unequal those relationships, the more power being held by one gender over the other, the more likely the abuse of that power. 

“There have been massive strides around gender equity, but the levels of violence indicate we’re still in very problematic territory,” she says. 

“We’re not going to be able to treat our way out of this social disaster.

“It’s clear when we look at the huge number of incidents of domestic and family violence that are occurring, and the number of family violence-related murders, that we need to be working on prevention fronts.”

Professor Humphreys’ team just completed an Australian Research Council (ARC)-funded project that looked at issues of intervention, issues around governance and the intervention system itself. 

“Women with a disability are much more vulnerable to family and domestic violence, as are aboriginal women and particularly young women,” she says. 

“The latest national Personal Safety Survey showed how very vulnerable women between the ages of 18 and 24 are. 

“We also found increased rates among people using alcohol and illegal drugs. There’s a relationship between the severity of the violence and the use of drugs and alcohol – It’s not that it causes domestic violence, but the severity of violence increases. It is also used as an excuse: it’s an accountability-free zone.”

Professor Humphreys says there are many different factors that contribute to family and domestic violence, including economic ones. 

“Where you have increased poverty, inequality and unemployment, you also see increased rates of domestic violence – as we get a more unequal society, domestic violence increases again.”

Family and domestic violence isn’t the only wicked problem facing women in Australia today. Gender equity in the workplace remains an all-encompassing, national issue. The pay gap between men and women is 17.5 per cent, and has consistently been between 15 per cent and 18 per cent over the past two decades.

Associate Professor of Organisational Behaviour at the Melbourne Business School Isabel Metz looks at gender equity and equality in the workplace. Like Professor Humphreys, she says there are many interwoven issues that contribute to the disparity, despite gender equality legislation being introduced 25 years ago. 

“This issue of the gender gap, be it in relation to pay or representation in leadership positions, is very complex. It varies by industry and sector, but it exists all the same,” she says. 

“There is a growing body of evidence showing that when you control for ‘variations’, such as career breaks, personality traits – let’s assume introverts may be less willing to negotiate their pay than extroverts – length of work experience, and level of education, we still find a gender difference in pay that is not explained by all the personal factors. 

“That unexplained residual is partly attributed to gender discrimination in pay. It exists and it is not explained by one factor only, nor is it explained only by women’s personal circumstances such as career breaks. 

“It involves an intersection of personal factors on the women’s side, and factors embedded in socialisation (stereotypes; status hierarchy in our society; social roles ascribed to men and women) and social networks (who you know or are connected with in influential networks) on the decision-maker’s side.

Associate Professor Metz says even if women are not ‘deficient’ in anything, such as in negotiation skills, their behaviour (in this case, how they negotiate) is interpreted differently or overlooked because of social expectations of how they should behave. 

“Men are also constrained by social expectations, but they seem to be able to engage in a wider range of ‘acceptable’ behaviour than women can, without suffering backlash (ie, without being penalised; for example, by not succeeding in their negotiation attempts for a pay rise),” she says. 

“It is complicated and it would really help address this issue if all decision-makers acknowledged (because a few already do) that their decision-making processes are not infallible; they are partly subjective and clouded by perceptions and stereotypes of working women and of women in society.” 

In interviews conducted as part of Dr Metz’s research, men and women executives both recognised how powerful social networks were.

“Behind closed doors, male executives will admit it is particularly difficult for their female colleagues to advance,” she says. 

“Further, there is a myth that women (who are managers and want to advance) leave because of family reasons. 

“I found only one in 10 women in positions at supervisor level or above left their organisations for family reasons: rather, many felt ‘pushed’ out by women-unfriendly organisational cultures. These women were not leaving to stay at home; they were leaving in search of ‘better’ employers. 

“Australia’s relatively poor position in terms of accessing female talent, compared to other countries like us (eg, the US), should raise questions about our decision-makers, not about the women,” she says. 

“And the question of sexism is a reasonable one with which to start.” 

For Professor Humphreys, the next research frontier actually focuses on men, and particularly fathers. 

Her new ARC project – Fathers: Family Violence and Intervention Challenges – works from the fact that in Australian society most men, no matter how violent and abusive, will still be in fathering roles and will have contact with children. 

“How do we engage with that evidence to look positively at what interventions and support are required for more responsive and responsible fathering?” she says. 

“There’s a group of men who shouldn’t have contact with children. But there’s also a group of men who will continue to have contact with children, and who are potentially responsive to change, 

“This motivation to change is created by wanting to be better fathers. 

“There’s no such thing as being a good father and being domestically violent, because the children are terrified by the violence and it’s emotionally abusive. Many men recognise that.”

Associate Professor Metz’s work too is increasingly showing gender equity actually means considering men.

“Many male executives expressed the desire for flexible work arrangements or shorter working days, so they could be more involved with their families. Yet, none would raise this possibility with their colleagues or with the CEO,” she says. 

“We found there was a strong culture of silence around this issue of work life balance and family responsibilities,” she says. “It’s not just a women’s issue any more.”

Professor Humphreys says we need to keep on looking at the issues around gender equity, inequality and respectful relationships between men and women. 

“It needs to be part of the fabric of our society which says no to violence, and no to domestic violence,” she says. 

“We have to ask what sort of society we want.

“On International Women’s Day, to be seeing the present rate of family violence, the number of murders, the number of women being stalked, really should be a wake-up call that we’ve got to do more.”

http://socialwork.unimelb.edu.au/