Is the Matilda Effect a category design problem?
“Gender bias does worldwide damage. It’s a cause of low productivity on farms. It’s a source of poverty and disease. It’s at the core of social customs that keep women down.” ― Melinda Gates, The Moment of Lift: How Empowering Women Changes the World
Gender Bias. Inequality. Glass Ceiling. Inclusivity. Diversity. Tokenization. These are some of the words used to describe how women are treated. I recently wrote a blog post on Dr. Sylvia Earle. In one of her interviews, speaking about gender bias, she said “ we create our own categories”. What she meant was that we define what boys and girls can do.
This sparked the impact-driven category designer in me. So I decided to go down the history of gender bias rabbit hole. An article on cosmos lead to such interesting insights. There was a study published by the European Journal of Archaeology. Upon analyzing graves from the Iberian Peninsula there seem to be definitive evidence that gender inequality started about 8000 years ago.
Here’s what Archaeologist Marta Cintas-Peña as detailed by cosmos said, on the number of graves:
The quantity of males cannot be natural.
Indicating that women and children were not given the same burial rights in Neolithic society. In addition, men were apparently buried with arrowheads and women with ceramics.
“All of the evidence that we found in some way linked to the predominance of men in terms of violence. There was a difference in power and this difference in power maybe was based in the use of violence by males.” — Source — https://cosmosmagazine.com/society/gender-inequality-arose-8000-years-ago/
Although we cannot definitively say exactly how gender inequality started. But I have a point of view as a category designer. Men and women are categories. But when we designed them, we did so functionally. Take a look at this table on “Contrasting Models for Neolithic and Bronze Age Gender” from Cambridge journal:
Here are the attributes using which we “defined” men and women:
- Men — hunter, big, strong, draw on cave walls
- Women — childbearing, cook, maker of clothes, looks after children
This was such a functional way to look at each of these categories. Let’s look at it with an impact-driven lens.
Men and Women — complementary strengths and weaknesses. The impact men and women have on society is the same. Any skill men can learn women can too. Anything men can build women can do. Anything women can do men can too. The kitchen has long been designated a place for the woman. But some of the greatest chefs in the world are men.
Doesn’t it immediately look different? This just goes to illustrate a point — the bias is largely functional.
For example-
If a man and a woman are on a call. The other party will automatically assume the man is in charge. The reality could be the woman is the Founder and CEO.
The Matilda Effect was “coined” by science historian Margaret W. Rossiter. It’s a bias in acknowledging and recognizing the work of women scientists. Their work is attributed to male scientists.
Why the name Matilda? It was named after Matilda Joslyn Gage. I’m not going to reveal too much about her here. She needs a category spotlight article of her own. She’s kickass!
Let’s look at a few examples of the Matlida Effect as documented by Margaret W Rossiter:
- Italian physician in the 12th century — Trota of Salerno. Attributed to male authors then work was credited to husband and son.
- 1861–1912 — Nettie Stevens. She discovered the X and Y sex chromosome determination. Her work was attributed to Thomas Hunt Morgan
- Dr. Lise Meitner during Nazi Germany time discovered pivotal research for nuclear fission. Credited to Otto Hahn including the Nobel Prize in Chemistry for “discoverer of nuclear fission”
- Dr. Alice Augusta Ball — Dean Method (actual name Ball Method), a pioneering treatment for leprosy. Name erased from the history of medicine
- Jocelyn Bell Burnell an astrophysicist that discovered radio pulsars. Excluded from the Nobel prize awarded to her thesis supervisor Antony Hewish and Martin Ryle (astronomer).
These are just 5 examples. There is an entire series called the Timeline Series that has documented the Matilda Effect.
The number of women overlooked, the impact they have had on science, technology, and human advancement. Words fail me. I don’t want to go down the path of ranting about how unfair this is. I think it's pretty obvious to anyone reading this.
I would however like to point out there are millions of women in offices all over the world who go through the casual Matilda Effect everyday.
- Men speaking over women at meetings
- Ideas women pitch overlooked, man, pitching the very same idea is celebrated
- Women overlooked for promotions
- Work women do, not seen as important
- Invisible work
Feminism has always been a movement. We stand on the shoulders of giants. If today we are even able to talk about the Matlida Effect it's because of giants such as Margaret W. Rossiter. She dedicated her life to shedding a light on this bias. There is so much more I can write on this. I will try and cover it in parts.
We need to redefine the category of men and women. It needs to STOP being functional and START being impact-driven. As soon as we starting seeing things with an impact lens, I believe we can start stripping away and addressing some of the age-old biases.