Kathleen Wynne, Ontario's first female premier.

Photo by Natasha Singh.

The question of women in the workplace has been asked over and over, and discussed and debated many times. It’s unfortunate; just as we begin to believe that women’s role in workplace is no longer debatable, we are confronted by an utterly disappointing statement by someone, somewhere, who still considers women “limited.”

We have a long way to go, and many obstacles to overcome. The female gender is still confined to specific societal roles.

Two years ago, Christine Lagarde became the first female to hold the position of managing director of the International Monetary Fund (IMF). It’s incredible to see this kind of role taken on by a female, and everything about it is important; it’s inspiring, it’s influential, and it’s progressive. But it’s not enough, because it was done out of necessity. The fact that she was appointed in a managerial role in her late 50s and only because of the resignation of a former director means  she was given her role. Former director Dominique Strauss-Kahn (DSK) resigned after allegations of sexual assault of a hotel worker were made against him. It’s fair to wonder whether the appointment of a female was the IMF’s PR campaign or a step forward for female leadership.

 It’s possible that the world would have never seen a female director had the former male in her role not resigned due to the legal issues. It’s more concerning that Lagarde’s position could potentially be the IMF’s damage control strategy. It’s also worth noting that DSK chose to resign, while Lagarde was put in her role of head of the IMF. This isn’t at all an underestimation of the importance of her gender in economics, or a lack of appreciation for the trend she’s setting for women who look up to her. This is simply a concern that the acceptance of women in once male-dominated roles is still subject to hesitation. It hasn’t become normalized enough for indifference. It still needs to be underlined every time it happens.

Just one year ago, women’s boxing became an Olympic sport.  The expansion of women’s boxing from a recreational sport all the way to the Olympics was not a smooth transition. Women’s Olympic boxing was ridiculed and opposed, and call a “freak show” by boxing manager Frank Maloney.

The debate about women’s “belongingness” in the athletic realm is nowhere near settled. The first women’s ultimate fighting championship (UFC) fight is scheduled to take place on Feb. 23 and its male viewership is limited. The most common reaction to female participation in mixed martial arts is disgust — men just don’t want to see women fight.  Full contact sport and fighting are still a “man’s thing.”  

The world is still assigning roles to women  so they are not too “masculinized.” One year ago, UFC fighter Quinton “Rampage” Jackson made a promotional video in which he presented instructions on how to rape a woman. After publicly apologizing for a video that he had to time to watch and reconsider shooting altogether, Rampage was allowed back into the UFC, and welcomed as an athlete despite the severity of what he did. 

The question is: what are we welcoming in the workplace? Is it progressive feminism or overt and offensive masculinization? Is there no fear that a man who humorously promotes rape is quickly reinstated in a sport faster than a woman who opposes it? Or that a man who could have sexually assaulted a female is granted the right to keep his position? 

Maybe we should wonder if womens’ rights to grow professionally and athletically are actually granted at the price of dignity.