this post was submitted on 27 Jun 2023
83 points (100.0% liked)

News

49 readers
2 users here now

Breaking news and current events worldwide.

founded 1 year ago
 

The incident highlights ongoing struggles with gender parity in Japan—which ranks lowest among G7 member states on the World Economic Forum’s Global Gender Gap Index.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Lightninhopkins@kbin.social 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This was a meeting on women's empowerment.

[–] AshDene@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

And where do you think a woman has more power? In a meeting on women's empowerment, or a meeting on... I don't know... how many weapons to give to Ukraine?

If you pull women away from the latter to send them to the former that is negatively impacting women's empowerment.

Like I said, the optics in this case make it worth it anyways, but it is not a clear cut rule where that is always the case, and it's easy to do it too often.

[–] livus@kbin.social 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'm struggling to understand why you think these specific women (and man) who are leaders on social empowerment are also going to be military logistics experts who are being pulled away from that field.

[–] AshDene@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Rather I think they're diplomats in senior government rolls, because they're at the G7. In US terms think state department, not DOD.

Regardless the exact nature of the other meeting isn't the point. The general fact that DEI work is usually not the most impactful work you can be doing in terms of personal development and growth in the organization is, so saying that under-represented people need to lead it harms under-represented people.

[–] livus@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I don't really understand US terms, but the man concerned is a Cabinet Minister, not a diplomat.

(A cabinit minister is the equivalent of if you had a high-up Senator who was in charge of overseeing policy in a sector, I guess).

So it's very much an elected leadership role.

Historically when we have had members of a majority in charge of Government portfolios/policy sectors that mainly affect minorities, I don't think you can credibly argue that was somehow "better for" under-represented people than being able to participate directly in leadership roles themselves.

Deciding which policies will benefit women in leadership roles is arguably of more direct benefit to the lived realities of women, than helping decide where/how to help arm soldiers in a war somewhere else in the world.

[–] ChemicalRascal@kbin.social 3 points 1 year ago

There's enough women out there that sending one as a delegate to a women's empowerment conference is not going to require pulling one out of a meeting about Ukraine armaments.

There's actually a lot of women around. So, so many. It's actually a little intimidating just how many women there are.