At a recent workshop on prevention of sexual harassment in the workplace, the facilitator began with an explanation of the forms of harassment.
The facilitator continued, “Bumping into a woman could be perceived as sexual harassment.” To most of us it was clear the facilitator meant ‘intentionally bumping into’. But to one very sceptical gentleman, this was a matter of concern.
“What if I bump into her by mistake? This law is unfair. It does not consider the voice of a man,” he said.
He was clearly speaking from a position of privilege.
He had the privilege of never having to experience the helplessness and fears of women who are often catcalled, who resort to putting out their elbows while walking amidst a crowd to avoid the intentional nudges. He had the privilege of not knowing what it feels like to be in a room and have to pretend to laugh about a joke against your gender.
Affirmative policies
Why do we need affirmative policies in the workplace? A recent survey by ActionAidUK found that 80 percent of Indian women are sexually harassed in public places.
One of the survey results also showed that 84 per cent of the women who experienced harassment belonged to the age group of 25 to 35 years and 82 per cent of them were full-time workers.
The Sexual Harassment of Women in the Workplace Act was passed in 2013, nearly 20 years after the Vishakha guidelines were put in place after the gruesome rape of Bhanweri Devi and the ‘vehement’ movement that followed to ensure women’s safety in the workplace.
This Act now includes explicit statements of what constitutes harassment as well as guidelines and code of conduct for employers to address all forms of harassment: physical, verbal and non-verbal. These firm guidelines were long coming.
Harassments of the verbal and non-verbal kind are ‘rampant’ in India. These regular exploits build an unsought expertise in most women to judge a deliberate action from a mistaken one.
In spite of the obvious need for the law, occasional outbursts are heard — “the problem with the law is that women often use it to their advantage”.
This unjust perception of the law stems from this opaque lens of privilege worn by those who enjoy it. That’s the catch of privilege.
It is easy to write volumes on the lack of it but to explain the privileges one enjoys is difficult. How then does one explain the helplessness of the victim or the urgency of the law to someone who had never experienced harassment? How do you explain the need for gender parity to someone who has never been on the receiving end of gender inequality?
Building an awareness for inclusive, safe environment isn’t an easy task. Sensitisation workshops are commonly implemented by companies to ensure safety and fairness.
Diversity and inclusion are big enough themes in most companies; most multinationals incorporate the diversity conversation into everyday values.
The success factor
But how successful are these initiatives in making a dent in the gender ratio?
Over time, certain movements begin to lose their power to influence us. Gender, diversity, parity are among those concepts that are losing their sway among the targeted audience.
One may argue that this is not true — we see many Facebook posts, talks, articles, rallies and protest movements.
But, the questions to ask are — Who is participating in these movements? Who is engaging in these conversations? More often than not, it is like-minded individuals: those affected by the problem and those who from the start empathise with the issue.
This does not address those who are resisting the change, those who are uncomfortable and those on the fence. It does not involve employees like the sceptical gentleman at the sexual harassment workshop. These exclusive conversations and celebration of women on one particular day (Women’s Day) are preaching to the choir and slowly increasing the bias against women in the workplace.
Playing the blame game and ignoring the apprehensive groups heighten defensiveness and bring no change.
Common ground
Gender talk has to be made inclusive.
Over time, our work has suggested that one of the best ways to have a dialogue on the fairness of affirmative action is to first build a common ground. Celebrations such as Women’s Day very often fail to engage the audience who would most benefit from it: not the women, but the skeptics.
The Women’s March on Washington on the 21st of January is a shining example.
Although started by women to protest the inauguration of the new president of the United States, in the end the movement encompassed many more facets: inclusion of immigration reform, healthcare reform, natural environment, LGBTQ rights, racial equality, freedom of religion, and workers’ rights.
The inclusive nature of the protest which gathered over 2 million protesters was flooded with online support making it the largest single-day demonstration in U.S. history.
Similarly, in the workplace, diversity conversations need to be broadened. Including other forms of diversity makes the cause more relatable. Men need to be included in the conversation, heard and dialogued with. It’s time to re-imagine gender celebrations like Women’s Day if we wish to attract new champions for diversity in the workplace.
( Chryslynn D’Costa heads the Diversity and Inclusion section at Serein Inc. )
