News and Views

What's caught my eye lately, with a gender equity lens

The deep dive

‘Useless’ health and wellbeing products are being marketed to women with ‘feminist’ messaging

In general, women have worse experiences with the medical profession than men. Medical misogyny is real, and much of the reason for a ‘gender pain gap’ is that women are persistently not believed by doctors when it comes to their experiences of their own pain or medical needs. So it feels particularly galling that corporations are capitalising on this sense of distrust of medical establishments to market tests and products not backed by evidence under the guise of ‘taking charge of your health’. 

It’s deeply manipulative and contributes to the problems of women not being trusted as experts of their own bodies. Co-opting feminist messaging to sell products isn’t new, but this feels like a whole new level of marketing manipulation. Selling products that aren’t backed by evidence and some that are not regulated can lead to significant harm.

The ‘egg timer test’ (AMH test) is one such test that has been called out for deceptive marketing. The test is marketed at women through the frame of ‘taking control of your fertility’. But science has shown that the test can not effectively predict your likelihood of conception or the timing for the onset of menopause. 

Products like these are accompanied with persuasive statements that ‘empower’ women to take control of their own health – even though they do not work. Taking advantage of women’s mistrust of medical institutions in order to sell health products or interventions that further undermine a woman’s understanding of her own health and wellbeing is just another way medical misogyny plays out. 

---

The ABS are considering changes to their time use survey that has massive impacts for data collection of the activities of women in particular

Australia's Bureau of Statistics (ABS) is considering scaling back the scope of its Time Use Survey. I know, statistics, surveys - easy to tune out. But this change could potentially make it more difficult to accurately measure unpaid childcare and housework, which disproportionately falls on women. 

Reduced data collection could make women's unpaid labour (which they do disproportionately more of compared to men) invisible in official statistics. This undervalues their contribution to the economy and society, hindering policy measures supporting work-life balance and gender equality.

Without accurate data, policymakers may lack insights into the gendered distribution of time and workload, leading to policies that fail to address women's specific needs and perpetuate existing inequalities. In a time when we’ve only just put gender responsive budgeting back into place, it seems regressive to even be considering changing this critical data collection! 

Downplaying the significance of unpaid work reinforces traditional gender roles and stereotypes, which has flow on impacts in discouraging women's participation in paid work.

Scaling back the Time Use Survey would have significant negative consequences for women, making their invaluable contributions invisible and hindering progress towards gender equality. Maintaining comprehensive data collection and analysis is essential for informing equitable policies and promoting a fairer society. I hope to see the ABS maintain this critical survey in full. 

---

New research shows that online images are amplifying gender bias

We’ve talked a bit lately about how AI generated images are built of biased assumptions, but even non-AI images are significantly amplifying the gender bias. People are spending more time viewing images than reading text online, and this study shows that genders stereotypes are more likely to be reinforced in images compared with text. 

Researchers found that images depict women more often in stereotypical roles related to appearance, domesticity, and emotions. Men, on the other hand, were more frequently associated with professional achievements, leadership, and agency. This discrepancy reinforces harmful societal biases and can limit the perceived capabilities and roles of both genders.

The research also suggests that algorithms used in image search and social media platforms might contribute to this amplification. When algorithms prioritise images that align with existing gender stereotypes, these algorithms can create feedback loops that further misrepresent or marginalise women and gender diverse people online.

It raises important concerns about the role of online images in perpetuating gender stereotypes and the need for more equitable and inclusive representation of genders in online visual content. Especially as AI uses existing images and datasets to create content. This just reinforces the gender bias and has a very real potential to make it worse. 

---

Meta won’t recommend political content

Threads and Instagram are set to limit ‘political’ content on the platforms by not ‘recommending’ anything deemed ‘political’ to anyone not already following the account. It is ostensibly being done to limit misinformation and disinformation in the leadup to the American election, but Meta’s refusal to engage with the problem is so frustrating. Making good quality political information less available is hardly the answer! Especially as so many people get their news or awareness of political issues from social media.

It’s unclear what counts as ‘political’ content at this stage. And when the personal (and everything else) is political, the predictable outcome will be that, yet again, people of intersecting minoritised or marginalised identities will be disproportionately impacted. I will be watching this policy progress with interest, particularly as a lot of the content I share could be classed as ‘political’. 

I get that no social media platform wants to go the way of Twitter, with Elon crippling their content moderation capabilities, but surely just implementing a policy where the news and political content isn’t seen as broadly is not a helpful approach. We need access to quality news and opinion on social media, not for companies to decide that making that happen is in the too hard basket. 

---

For something lighter

Some less-serious, more-fun content I’ve enjoyed lately:

• Taylor Swift discourse has crossed over with grammar nerd arguments

• Weeks on, I’m still obsessed with the Royel Otis ‘Murder on the Dancefloor’ Like A Version

• Speaking of things living rent-free in my head, Barnaby’s Three Quadrants

• Millennials think talking on the phone is a fate worse than death (phone call discourse has been big in my work chats lately)