Translator: Ellen Maloney Reviewer: Denise RQ
Look at me.
What do you see?
Obviously, I am a woman standing on a stage.
Many of you, perhaps most of you,
will already have started to create a mental image of who I am.
Maybe also, associate me with being so and so,
simple because I'm a woman.
No surprise; we all do that.
We all assess people by the first impressions; the people we meet.
Often we also tend to generalize what women and men are.
We sometimes even seem obsessed by the gender differences, don't we?
Every peer consultant knows this;
aiming for impact?
OK, focus on the differences between women and men,
and you'll make headlines.
It's a paradox,
that the public gender debate makes the exact same mistake.
And I've had my share of these debates,
and I can tell you, within a couple of minutes,
we all start generalizing how men are, how women are,
and it's often in a very non-flattering way.
I can tell you.
Men, they say, they work like this; upwards.
They are ambitious extroverts, aiming for their own benefit.
Women, on the other hand, they work like this --
inclusive.
They are great caretakers, and working for the common best.
Well, thanks, but if anyone thinks that would be flattering,
you are sorely mistaken.
You see, by focusing on the differences between men and women,
and how men and women work,
we even further cement the stereotypes,
and limit our chances to be seen as unique individuals.
And just as often as women discuss and analyze how men are,
men tell women how we work.
This usually results in a mixture of flattery and unintended insults.
Now, don't get me wrong; I think we all mean well.
We all think we are being fair.
It's just that what we seem to believing
is that women need that extra push.
And the assumption here is that women lack initiative.
Women's so-called "differences" from men has been used throughout history
to keep women in their place;
sometimes even oppress them.
This has, in parts of the world, and in our part of the world, improved.
But unfortunately, we have not passed
the attitude of stereotyping women.
So what you think you see is not what you get,
and don't tell me who I am.
The more we repeat these stereotypes, the stronger they become,
and the farther we distance ourselves from being unique individuals.
I am completely convinced
that stereotypes cement gender roles,
and this limits both women and men, in a very bad way.
But instead of standing up to these stereotypes,
we often accept them as true.
Instead we try to fix the outcome, with quotas for women,
affirmative actions, differential treatment.
But this is nothing but addressing the symptoms and not solving the problem.
As a liberal feminist,
I'm against all types of quota systems and differential treatments.
Why?
Because differential treatment is always going to be wrong.
I am often asked why I don't find the low number of women
in executive boards to be a problem.
My answer is always the same:
the outcome is never the problem.
The problem is
the culture and the attitudes that leads up to it.
There's a big difference between changing a bunch of statistics,
and changing attitudes.
The latter is much harder to accomplish.
If one wants to tweak the stats, you can just pass on another law,
change the law.
But that's not going to affect the problem,
and the root cause of the problem.
It's just cosmetics.
Could quotas for women solve the problem?
Maybe it could pay off in the short-term.
But what about in the long-term?
If we really want to change,
and if we really want to get to the bottom of the problem,
we all have to change our attitudes.
We also have to change the way we treat each other.
That's the long-term solution.
Let me borrow Martin Luther King's famous words;
"I have a dream that my children will one day live in a nation
where they will not be judged by the color of their skin
but by the content of their character."
This is exactly what change has to be about.
To be judged, based on our individuality, and not by the group identity.
It does not matter which gender you belong to;
what matters if that you are you.
Another common argument in favor of quotas
is that women have to be represented.
"Women are underrepresented," that's what they say,
maybe you recognize that.
The problem is, when you say that one woman
is representative for all other women,
you also assume that the group "women" is a homogeneous one.
What a bizarre idea.
If this was true,
then any one woman would be easily replaced with just another woman.
We would all have the same type of competence and personality;
that's what people commonly refer to as "the female competence."
I don't want to disappoint you, but honestly,
there's no such thing as female competence.
Every person's qualities, capabilities, and competences are their own.
They are all unique; we're all different.
We should all have the right to our talents, feelings, and competences.
We do have that right, it's just that too often, we are simply not aware of it.
I have a twin brother, as you heard.
When he does his perfect parallel parking,
- he's sitting over here, by the way -
when he does his perfect parallel parking,
it's not because he's a man doing it.
It's because, as an individual, he's a master of parallel parking.
Among other things, of course.
And when a woman is good with children,
we should give her the credit for this amazing talent,
and not diminish her skills by just saying,
"That's what women do."
On the other hand,
hiding behind a group to avoid taking responsibility
is equally wrong.
We shouldn't hide behind the stereotypes
and not use the stereotypes as excuses.
If you've ever seen Matt Lucas' character, Daffyd Thomas in Little Britain,
you know what I mean.
Everything from his unemployment to his unwanted single life
is excused by,
"I'm the only gay in the village."
Maybe you recognize it.
It's always somebody else's fault, never his own responsibility.
Don't hide behind a group, because if you do,
then you'll also be hidden behind it
the day that you want to be seen as a person.
The individual price of collectivism is a very high one to pay.
Gender equality is about each and everybody's right
to be judged, known, and treated as an individual,
and not as a representative of a collective.
Wait a second.
From a biological perspective,
there are clear and undeniable differences.
Of course, there are certain physical differences.
There are also different behavioral patterns,
which are more commonly observed
in women, or in men, or vice versa.
But these are more often the outcome of a specific culture,
of the social upbringing, than of gender.
Just take a walk in the children's department at H&M,
and you'll know what I mean.
There you can literally see what social upbringing looks like;
it's either very, very "princess pink", or very, very "Batman blue."
I am convinced that there are bigger differences between individuals
than between gender.
The world cannot be divided
into two homogeneous collectives.
The human being is much bigger than that.
The only differences that really exist are those that we created ourselves,
and then maintain them by continuously pointing them out.
Left-wing parties have a history
of turning the female identity into politics:
what a women should think, what she should wear,
what she should look like.
For them, it's all about politics.
But the conservatives are no better.
They too have opinions on how women are and should be like.
The female appearance is just as political for the Conservatives,
as for their left-wing counterparts.
Now, please note, this never applies to men.
Conservatives are also quick to state how men and women work,
and exactly like their left-wing counterparts,
they use politics to steer the behavior of us all.
That's what politics do.
Our values and ideas are not created in our reproductive organs;
they are the results of our intellectual development,
of our maturity.
This is why labeling women and men with certain political views or ideas
just doesn't make sense.
The difference between individuals is manifold greater
than the one between the sexes.
What do I propose then
if quotas and politics doesn't work?
I say, look at each each other.
See each other for who we are
and question pre-conceptions.
Don't be trapped by someone else's biased ideas,
and do not take cover behind a group identity,
which may very soon preclude the view
of everything that's important and beautiful in life.
If you only will remember one thing from today,
please just remember this;
you can start changing the world, right now, from your seat,
by promising me to never, ever again to say,
"That is so typical of a woman", and, "That is so typical of a man."
Because it doesn't matter if you are a woman or a man,
what matters is that you are you.
Thank you.
(Applause)