Summary

The article discusses the importance of using facts to combat gender bias, particularly the "emotional woman" trope, by providing practical advice and examples from Louise Minchin's experience with pay equity and research on emotional expression in the workplace.

Abstract

The article, titled "How To Avoid The 'Emotional Woman' Trope," emphasizes the necessity for women to arm themselves with facts when advocating for equality and fair treatment in various settings, such as the workplace. It recounts BBC journalist Louise Minchin's personal experience with pay disparity and her strategic use of data to confront the issue. The author underscores that facts are crucial in preventing women from being dismissed as overly emotional and provides tips on how to effectively use data to support claims of sexism or inequality. The article also references a 2015 study that highlights the differing impacts of emotional expression on influence for men and women, suggesting that women may lose influence when expressing anger, unlike men. The author concludes by offering practical advice for women to assert themselves confidently and rationally in the face of sexism, using facts to bolster their arguments and ensure their voices are heard and respected.

Opinions

The author believes that women are often unfairly labeled as "emotional" to undermine their credibility and that this stereotype must be countered with concrete evidence.
Louise Minchin is presented as a role model who effectively used data to challenge pay inequity, demonstrating the power of facts in such disputes.
The article suggests that emotional expression, particularly anger, can have divergent consequences for men and women in professional settings, potentially affecting women's influence and decision-making power.
The author advocates for preparation and research, asserting that having facts at hand not only strengthens one's position but also provides confidence and clarity during confrontations.
It is implied that societal change, including challenging sexist behavior, requires individuals to be informed about their rights and the relevant laws, such as the UK's Equality Act 2010.
The author encourages women to document instances of unfair treatment and to use this evidence when addressing issues with employers, colleagues, or in personal relationships, to avoid being dismissed or ignored.

How To Avoid The “Emotional Woman” Trope

Just the facts, ma’am

I had the pleasure of attending the Postcards From Midlife live event in London two weeks ago. Two days of stimulating, informative, and entertaining talks from various experts gave much food for thought.

In her session, BBC TV journalist Louise Minchin mentioned her fight for pay equity on the morning show she hosted. Long story short, she was paid less than her male co-hosts because, she was told, she was younger and less experienced. Fair enough. Fast forward to younger, less experienced Dan Walker joining her on the sofa; Louise was congratulated on earning the same as him …

Despite being the newbie, it seemed Walker was given most of the show and segment openers. After several attempts to discuss this and knowing any claims would be questioned or challenged, Louise did what any good journalist does and tracked the openers for three months. Her data showed that her male colleague was given 95% of them. Louise told us she walked into her boss’s office and gave them two options — either they could talk about giving her more segment openers, or they could sit down, look at three months of tracking data and then discuss the problem. They discussed the problem.

In the Q&A after her talk, I asked Louise for one practical tip for young women in fighting for parity. Her answer?

FACTS.

Arm yourself with facts to back up any request or complaint; that way, they can’t accuse you of being ‘too emotional’.

As most women know, the term ‘emotional’ is deployed to silence us or avoid conversation. “I can’t talk to you when you’re this emotional.” Women are dismissed or undervalued when expressing most emotions despite men allowing themselves anger. The so-called ‘masculine emotions’ see us criticized and put back in our place; when we express ‘feminine’ emotions, we’re seen as unprofessional, unreliable, or out of control.

In a 2015 study, the authors’ findings suggested that —

“… expressing anger might lead men to gain influence, but women to lose influence over others (even when making identical arguments). These diverging consequences might result in women potentially having less influence on societally important decisions than men, such as jury verdicts.”

In my book, I suggest one of the following responses if ‘emotional’ is ever lobbed at you:

“Yes, I have many emotions; this one happens to be “annoyed”. “I can talk and emote at the same time.” “You seem to be angry; that’s another emotion.” “Yes, I’m also passionate about this subject.”

Arming yourself with facts does a lot of heavy lifting:

You might uncover more information & further boost your claim. For example, in the above case, the data might not only have proven Louise had 5% of openers but also that they were only about soft issues. Asking questions around the data will help you add to your argument and answer any pushback.

Ask yourself — How often does this happen? To whom does it happen most frequently? When does it happen? What are the consequences? Who benefits? Who does it hurt? (The last two points will also need their own set of facts — What does the impact look like? etc.)

Like rehearsing the words you’ll use, hard data gives you a degree of confidence. My book on standing up to sexism provides options for what to say in various situations. Practising what to say will make you feel calmer going in, more likely to be coherent and less likely to lose sleep over what you could have said. There’s nothing worse than blowing it by being unable to get to the end of a sentence because you’re too upset, nervous, or just haven’t thought it through.

Preparation is key; likewise, with facts, you need to be able to recite them by heart.

Doing your research makes you the expert. Unless you’re arguing academics with your teacher or professor, digging around for facts will likely put you one step ahead. Unfair shifts or promotions? Get the data. Wage discrepancy? Ditto. Even if you’re telling a friend to stop asking to borrow money, you won’t get far unless you have several examples up your sleeve. While facts don’t guarantee a win, they make it far less likely that you’ll be waived away.

Everyday situations where facts are your friend:

If you’re prone to generalizations or to ask, “Why do you always ….?” you’ll need examples because the immediate response is going to be “I don’t” or “When do I ever do that?” I recommend omitting the word “always” to avoid the world’s biggest eye roll anyway.
Complaint about a teacher, landlord, or neighbour? They all require the same — time, date, and place of several examples; impact on you or your family; what the law says; violation of any contracts; previous attempts to resolve the issue.
Workplace complaints require hard facts. Not only do you need several examples of the problem, how it impacts you, and what you’ve done to address it, but you’ll also want to recite the company policy and the law (which is often easy to Google. Make sure you read a government web site and not Joe Social’s opinion.) E.g. in the UK, if a colleague is making daily comments about ‘how well your clothes fit’, keep a record of all occurrences, as well as who else heard and how you tried to stop it. Read up on the company’s policy manual or terms of employment to see if harassment is addressed, and point them to the 2010 Equality Act, which not only defines sexual harassment but places a responsibility on companies to try to prevent it. (Here’s a great explanation from ACAS.) There’s nothing like telling bosses you’re aware of the law to make them sit up.
Even in domestic situations, facts matter. Whining or shouting won’t get a positive result if your spouse or partner isn’t pulling their weight or spending enough time with the kids. Comparing what you both do might initially make them defensive, but it’ll be much harder to suggest you’re exaggerating.
Similarly, with kids —(caveat, this is not fool-proof)— yelling at them about this and that will result in the inevitable slammed door, but pointing out that leaving plates around the house is by default, saying they expect you to clean up after them, might make a dent. I once asked one of mine, “When do I ever talk to you like this?” You could have knocked me over with a feather when the response was, “Fair point.”

A win isn’t guaranteed, but with facts at your fingertips, you’re at least at first base. As Louise Minchin discovered, going in with nothing but a bad feeling doesn’t cut the mustard when you’re fighting for parity. Why would they give up anything so easily? Arming yourself with hard data or other such ‘proof’ shows you mean business and makes it harder to dismiss your point.