Gender Neutral Policies & Their Potential Harm to Women

This last weekend was homecoming week at my former high school. Homecoming court has been an important tradition to the school and underwent policy changes in my Senior year. Formally, the homecoming court ceremony consisted of 5 "Princes" and 5 "Princesses" voted on by the school for their accomplishments and contributions during their time at the school. During the ceremony, one women and one man from the court would be crowned homecoming Queen and King. My Freshman year, an out gay male student was elected as one of the Homecoming princesses, to which he accepted the election and the school permitted him to serve as a princess. This is the only recent example of gender-bending the rules, and came with minimal public controversy to my knowledge. My senior year they changed the court so that 1) voting was gender neutral, you voted for ten individuals, 2) members of SEC (student government) were not eligible to be on the court and 3) there would no longer be a queen or king, just a court of ten students. This year, they changed it back so that members of SEC could be on the court. For the past 2/3 years that the new rules have been in place, women have be in the minority of the court by more than one member difference. My senior year, there was 6 female, 5 male, the next year there was a sudden drop with 2 female, 8 male, and this year 3 female and 8 male. In addition, the temporary ruling that SEC members cannot serve effectively barred the only female student body president and vice president that served during the past five years of the school from the court. Though the policy has only been in place for three years, the trend from my senior year to now is discouraging for female representation.

This dilemma behind gender-blindness and representation is reminiscent of our brief discussion in class on gender-neutral paternity leave and other policies, as researched by CMC professor Heather Antecol. The attached article does a good job summarizing the study and how new policies discriminated against women, including how the "stopping the clock" even benefitted tenure for men and decreased tenure for women.

As the name of the study, "Equal but Inequitable," highlights, both the homecoming ruling and new paternity leave policies demonstrate how acting in the name of equality can leave cracks that allow for even increased unfair treatment. It's sad to look back at my high school and see that many female students who are in high leadership positions and tirelessly contribute to the community are not recognized by their peers, however how does recognition change when you enforce a quota? Is the idea of a homecoming court at all rooted in exclusion? Is paternity leave an example of "gender difference" arguments, where men and women should not be treated in the same manner? Though the two examples deal with very different circumstances and stakes, both demonstrate the double edge sword of gender neutral rulings.

https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2016/06/27/stopping-tenure-clock-may-help-male-professors-more-female-study-finds