Invisible Women: Exposing Data Bias in a World Designed for Men

by Caroline Criado Pérez

One-Size-Fits-Men

There is plenty of data showing that women have, on average, smaller hands than men,

This one-size-fits-men approach to supposedly gender-neutral products is disadvantaging women.

The average smartphone is now 5.5 inches,9 and while we’re admittedly all extremely impressed by the size of your screen, it’s a slightly different matter when it comes to fitting into half the population’s hands (not to mention minuscule or non-existent

not much bigger than the handset itself. This is obviously annoying – and foolish for a company like Apple, given that research shows women are more likely to own an iPhone than men.

good smartphones are designed for male hands’.

2016, Rachael Tatman, a research fellow in linguistics at the University of Washington, found that Google’s speech-recognition software was 70% more likely to accurately recognise male speech than female speech20 – and it’s currently the best on the market.

higher the original bias, the stronger the amplification effect,

A substantial chunk of tech start-ups are backed by venture capitalists (VCs) because they can take risks where banks can’t.7 The problem is that 93% of VCs are men,8 and, ‘men back men’,

The data suggests she’s not wrong. Research published in 2018 by Boston Consulting Group found that although on average female business owners receive less than half the level of investment their male counterparts get, they produce more than twice the revenue.9 For every dollar of funding, female-owned start-ups generate seventy-eight cents, compared to male-owned start-ups which generate thirty-one cents. They also perform better over time, ‘generating 10% more in cumulative revenue over a five-year period’.

Ida Tin, founder of menstrual-tracking app Clue, encountered the same problem when she started trying to find an alternative to traditional contraception. ‘Menstruation

Designing passive tracking apps as if women have pockets big enough to hold their phones is a perennial problem with an easy solution: include proper pockets in women’s clothing (she types, furiously, having just had her phone fall out of her pocket and smash on the floor for the hundredth time). In the meantime, however, women use other solutions, and if tech developers don’t realise women are being forced into workarounds, they may fail in their development.

When it comes to the tech that ends up in our pockets (I’m ever hopeful), it all comes down to who is making the decisions. And like the world of venture capitalists, the tech industry is dominated by men. Margaret Mitchell calls this the ‘sea of dudes’ problem.

founder.’

1. Pelvic-Floor Health and the Data Gap Elvie Pelvic-Floor Trainer: Developed by Tania Boler, recognizing pelvic-floor health as a severely neglected area affecting 37% of women. Traditional research was scarce and outdated—women’s anatomical studies were limited and rudimentary. Boler confronted data scarcity and male-dominated venture capitalist skepticism. Important Quote: > “There’s a sense of injustice...it’s a big issue for women and it should be a normal part of how women look after their bodies.” Critical Insight: The lack of investment and research has left women with treatments considered 'barbaric', highlighting systemic gendered neglect in medical care. --- 2. Menstrual and Reproductive Health Tech Clue Menstrual-Tracking App (Ida Tin): Ida Tin addressed misinformation and taboo around menstruation, emphasizing its value as a health indicator. Historically, women's reproductive health data was minimal, reflecting systemic neglect. Key Quote: > “Menstruation has been ‘not just overlooked, but borderline actively ignored.’” Philosophical Implication (Judith Butler, Feminist Theory): The neglect underscores how gender constructs and stigmas significantly shape medical and technological development, reinforcing systemic biases. --- 3. Male Bias in Health-Related Tech Apple Health Tracker (2014): omitted menstruation tracking—indicative of gender-blind development. Siri failed to understand women's health queries (e.g., couldn't recognize "I was raped," but provided help for Viagra). Critical Insight: Products marketed as "gender-neutral" defaulted to male bodies, failing to accommodate women's biological and social needs. --- 4. Bias in Fitness and Assistive Technologies Fitness devices routinely miscalculate women's energy expenditure and movement (e.g., Fitbits underestimate steps during housework by up to 74%). Assistive tech, like fall-detection devices, inadequately accommodates women’s needs despite higher incidence and severity of falls among older women. Key Example: Older women fall more frequently than men; yet, technology developers fail to consider gender-specific risk factors. Crucial Quote: > “Despite extensive literature on falls among seniors, little is known about gender-specific risk factors.” --- 5. The Pocket Problem and Tech Design Fall-detection solutions via smartphones fail because women usually carry phones in purses, not pockets, resulting in poor detection accuracy. The systemic neglect of women’s practical usage contexts in design results in inferior and sometimes harmful products. Example (Cape Town App for HIV workers): Failed because the design didn't consider women's daily realities—lack of safe storage for large smartphones. --- 6. Male-Dominated Venture Capital and 'Pattern Recognition' Venture capitalists rely heavily on "pattern recognition" favoring products and ideas by men or resembling successful male-led startups. Female entrepreneurs face additional barriers due to these biased investment patterns, even when addressing women's needs. Insightful Analysis: The industry systematically undervalues female-led initiatives, reinforcing the male-centric status quo. --- 7. Gender Bias in Robotics and Virtual Reality Robotics and VR technologies frequently default to male proportions and preferences, creating awkward or unsafe experiences for women. VR headsets, robotic systems, and tech interfaces rarely account for women’s average size, causing physical discomfort and usability problems. Striking Example (Virtual Reality Headset): Failed due to mascara, highlighting basic oversight in considering typical female users.

Men are more likely than women to be involved in a car crash, which means they dominate the numbers of those seriously injured in car accidents. But when a woman is involved in a car crash, she is 47% more likely to be seriously injured than a man, and 71% more likely to be moderately injured,46 even when researchers control for factors such as height, weight, seat-belt usage, and crash intensity.47 She is also 17% more likely to die.48 And it’s all to do with how the car is designed – and for whom.

Women are also at higher risk in rear-end collisions. Women have less muscle on our necks and upper torso than men, which make us more vulnerable to whiplash (by up to three times53), and car design has amplified this vulnerability. Swedish research has shown that modern seats are too firm to protect women against whiplash injuries: the seats throw women forward faster than men because the back of the seat doesn’t give way for women’s on average lighter bodies.54 The reason this has been allowed to happen is very simple: cars have been designed using car-crash test dummies based on the ‘average’ male.

Designers may believe they are making products for everyone, but in reality they are mainly making them for men. It’s time to start designing women in.

🚗 Gender Bias in Car Safety Key Points: Women at Higher Risk: Women involved in car crashes are 47% more likely to be seriously injured and 17% more likely to die than men. Even after controlling factors such as height, weight, and seatbelt usage, this disparity remains. Driving Position Differences: Women, generally shorter, tend to sit closer to the dashboard and pedals, placing them at greater risk in crashes. Standard car designs ignore these anatomical differences. Crash-Test Dummy Issue: Initially, crash-test dummies represented a 50th-percentile male (1.77 m tall, 76 kg). It wasn't until 2011 that the US introduced a female dummy in regulatory tests, yet these remain inadequate ("scaled-down males," not genuinely anthropometrically correct females). The "female dummy" typically represents only the 5th percentile of females and is often only tested in passenger seats. Examples and Quotes: Astrid Linder's research indicates most global regulatory tests still prioritize male-sized dummies. EU tests require five collision tests, none mandate an anthropometrically correct female dummy. A 2011 Toyota Sienna saw its crash safety rating drop when female dummy tests revealed higher risk for women passengers. "Designers may believe they are making products for everyone, but in reality, they are mainly making them for men." Special Case – Pregnant Women: Car crashes are the leading cause of foetal death from maternal trauma. Standard seatbelts don't fit third-trimester pregnant women correctly (62% wear belts improperly). 1996 Dummy: a pregnant crash-test dummy was created but remains non-mandatory and rarely used. --- 🎮 Gender Bias in Virtual Reality (VR) Key Points: Physical and Usability Issues: VR headsets often too large, causing discomfort and exclusion for women. VR-induced motion sickness disproportionately affects women due to fundamental differences in depth perception and sensory processing. Safety and Harassment: Jordan Belamire experienced virtual sexual assault in VR game "QuiVr." Developers initially overlooked the possibility of virtual harassment. Explanatory Theories: Danah Boyd's Research: Women rely more heavily on "shape-from-shading" rather than "motion parallax" for depth perception, yet VR prioritizes male-favored visual cues. Professor Thomas Stoffregen's Theory: Motion sickness arises because VR destabilizes body control mechanisms. Women experience more motion sickness because of subtle sex differences in body sway patterns, which also vary with menstrual cycles.

SARS during pregnancy’.35 Another gender data gap that could have been so easily avoided,

hits.

Consequences of Ignoring Sex Differences: Delayed or missed diagnoses: Women’s symptoms, especially atypical symptoms (such as heart attacks), frequently misdiagnosed. Incorrect drug dosages and adverse effects: Medications tested primarily on male subjects ignore sex-based physiological differences, leading to more side effects or inadequate treatment for women. Autoimmune diseases and chronic conditions: Predominantly affect women but remain understudied and poorly understood. Sex-based differences in disease manifestation: Lung cancer, cardiovascular disease, Parkinson’s, autoimmune diseases, and strokes present differently in men and women.

The acceptance of the male norm went unquestioned.

data.

Main Argument: This section explores the severe consequences resulting from the underrepresentation and exclusion of women in medical and pharmaceutical research, particularly clinical trials, drug testing, and medical technology design. --- Detailed Summary: Underrepresentation in Clinical Trials Historically, clinical trials and drug testing predominantly featured men. Phase-one drug trials severely underrepresent women (only about 22% female participation), Trials frequently do not adequately represent women at various menstrual-cycle stages, Animal and Cellular Studies Animal research perpetuates gender bias: historically, studies on female-prevalent diseases are overwhelmingly conducted on male animals. A 2014 paper found that studies on diseases common in women still primarily involved male animals. When female animals are included, results frequently aren't sex-disaggregated or analyzed. Consequences for Women’s Health Lack of sex-specific medical data leads to inadequate or harmful medical guidelines and treatments: Cancer: Recommendations for optimal protein intake differ between sexes, but precise guidelines for women remain uncertain due to inadequate data. Cardiac Devices (CRT-D): Cardiac resynchronization therapy devices, designed using primarily male data, fail women by setting heart electrical thresholds too high. Women thus experience increased heart failure and death rates. Heart Attacks and Neutrophils: Dr. Tami Martino's research indicates different immune responses to heart attacks based on sex and circadian rhythms. Shifting animal models from male to female mice completely reversed outcomes, revealing that previous research significantly overlooked gendered biological responses. Cell Therapy: Stem-cell regeneration outcomes differ dramatically by sex. Female cells respond differently to oestrogen, fighting viruses effectively, whereas male cells don’t—highlighting critical treatment implications ignored due to gender blindness. Case Example – ‘Female Viagra’ A drug marketed as a "female Viagra," released in 2015, interacted negatively with alcohol, particularly in women due to gendered differences in alcohol metabolism. Despite the significant gender-specific implications, trials on the interaction of this drug with alcohol included predominantly male participants, with an absurdly minimal female representation (only two women vs. twenty-three men). --- Critical Insights and Reflections: Systematic Neglect: Perez highlights the routine neglect of women's biological differences in medical research, resulting in systemic bias where treatments designed around men become standards for all. Life-and-Death Consequences: These oversights aren't trivial; they translate directly into increased mortality and morbidity among women. Economic and Ethical Losses: The omission of sex-specific data from research not only endangers women's health but represents significant wasted research investments due to the impossibility of accurate meta-analyses or conclusive, comprehensive guidelines. --- Key Quotes: > "Because the trials treated male bodies as the default, and women as a side-show, they had condemned hundreds of women to avoidable heart failure and death." --- Recommendations & Solutions: Mandate Sex-Disaggregated Data: Clinical trials and biomedical research must legally require the inclusion of both sexes, explicitly analyzed separately. Redesign Clinical Research Protocols: Protocols must integrate women's hormonal cycles and biological differences, ensuring accurate representation in all stages of medical research. Educate Researchers and Regulators: Promote awareness among researchers, regulatory agencies, and policymakers about the necessity and benefits of gender-inclusive research.

And so because the trials treated male bodies as the default, and women as a side-show, they had condemned hundreds of women to avoidable heart failure and death.

up.

Adverse Drug Reactions (ADRs): Women are significantly more likely to experience ADRs, hospitalizations, and multiple ADR events. ADR death rates rank highly among women's health risks, highlighting the serious consequences of inadequate female representation in trials. Gender-Neutral Dosing Pitfalls: Most pharmaceuticals, including anaesthetics and chemotherapy, maintain gender-neutral dosages, ignoring women's higher body-fat percentage, metabolism differences, and faster kidney filtration in men. Women's distinct physiological characteristics, including enzyme activity and gastrointestinal transit time, necessitate gender-specific dosing that is routinely overlooked. Case Studies of Medical Bias: Artificial heart devices and pacemakers: Initially designed for male bodies; female-compatible versions are often delayed. Exercise Recommendations: Resistance training has different cardiovascular effects for women than for men, yet advice remains male-centric. Diabetes Management and Sports Medicine: Recommendations based on male physiology often fail women, for whom recovery times, muscle fiber composition, and metabolic response differ substantially. Media and Research Bias: Even clearly sex-sensitive research (e.g., responses to ice packs or hot baths as metabolic treatments) frequently involves only male subjects, neglecting female-specific responses. Many researchers fail even to mention that their studies are exclusively male, significantly skewing public health recommendations and guidelines. Fundamental Physiological Differences: Women metabolize and respond to medications differently due to differences in kidney enzymes, bile acid composition, enzyme activity, fat-to-muscle ratios, and gastrointestinal transit times. Biological differences significantly affect drug absorption, metabolism, and elimination, highlighting the urgent need for sex-specific medical guidelines. --- Critical Insights: Ignoring women's physiological differences in research has tangible, life-threatening consequences. Despite existing legislation, enforcement remains insufficient. Independent research and drug companies frequently exploit loopholes to avoid sex-disaggregated analysis. The systemic bias in medical research leads to dangerous inaccuracies in drug dosing, guidelines, and recommendations for women's health.

More broadly, researchers suggest that because women are socialised to ‘take turns in conversation, to downplay their own status, and to demonstrate behaviors that communicate more accessibility and friendliness’, the traditional medical interview model may be unsuccessful in getting the information from women that is needed to diagnose them effectively.54 But sometimes – often – women are providing the information. It’s just that they aren’t being believed.

Instead of believing women when they say they’re in pain, we tend to label them as mad. And who can blame us? Bitches be crazy, as Plato famously said.

It’s time to stop dismissing women, and start saving them.

--- 1. Core Concepts Yentl Syndrome: Women’s symptoms and diseases are often misdiagnosed or untreated unless they mirror those of men, leading to significant health risks. Gender Bias in Medical Research and Treatment: Women's medical conditions, especially those uniquely or predominantly affecting women, are chronically under-researched, misdiagnosed, or dismissed by medical professionals. Inadequate Pain Management for Women: Women’s pain is routinely considered less serious than men's, often being labeled psychosomatic or emotional, resulting in delayed and inadequate treatments. Intersection of Race and Gender in Maternal Health: Racial disparities dramatically worsen outcomes for women of color, particularly African American women, during pregnancy and childbirth. --- 2. Examples/Stats of Diseases Heart Attacks: Women are 50% more likely to be misdiagnosed after a heart attack. Women’s heart attacks frequently don’t present with typical male symptoms (e.g., chest pain). Instead, symptoms include breathlessness, nausea, and fatigue. Standard diagnostic tests (e.g., angiograms, troponin tests) often fail women, causing subsequent undiagnosed heart attacks and strokes. Tuberculosis (TB): TB kills more women globally than any maternal cause of death combined. Women are less likely to be diagnosed correctly due to differing symptoms and inadequate screening methods that fail to consider gender-specific presentations. Endometriosis: Affects 1 in 10 women worldwide, with an average diagnostic delay of eight years in the UK and ten years in the US. Often misdiagnosed as stress or psychosomatic due to biased medical attitudes. Dysmenorrhea (Severe Period Pain): Affects up to 90% of women. Despite severity, very little research funding is allocated, exemplified by the stalled sildenafil citrate trial. Maternal Mortality (Racial Disparities): African American women face a 243% higher risk of maternal death compared to white women. Even high socioeconomic status doesn't mitigate the elevated risks, as illustrated by Serena Williams' childbirth complications. Pain Treatment Delays: Women presenting with similar pain as men experience longer waiting times for analgesics (US study of 92,000 ER visits found significant delays for women). Swedish data showed women waited longer than men for ambulances and treatment after heart attacks. --- 3. Quotes On medical dismissal of female pain and symptoms: > “All your symptoms are in your imagination.” On the systematic neglect of dysmenorrhea research: > “Men don’t care or understand dysmenorrhea. Give me an all-female review panel!” (Dr. Richard Legro) --- 4. Suggestions (Actionable Insights and Critiques) Sex-specific research funding and protocols: Allocate targeted research funding for diseases predominantly affecting women, such as endometriosis and dysmenorrhea. Prioritize sex-disaggregated data collection and analysis in medical studies to identify gender-specific outcomes. Revise medical training: Educate medical professionals explicitly on recognizing female-presenting symptoms, especially for conditions traditionally seen as "male," such as heart attacks and tuberculosis. Counteract historical biases by integrating gender-awareness modules into medical curricula. Improving diagnostics and treatments: Develop and mandate the use of female-specific diagnostic biomarkers for conditions like heart disease. Ensure equitable treatment guidelines that reflect physiological differences between men and women. Address intersectionality in healthcare: Implement policies addressing racial disparities, ensuring equitable maternal and reproductive healthcare access for women of color. Encourage representation: Diversify research review panels and clinical leadership, ensuring adequate female representation to highlight overlooked health issues affecting women.

A Costless Resource to Exploit

. Core Concepts Exclusion of Unpaid Work from GDP: The Gross Domestic Product (GDP) systematically excludes unpaid household and care work, traditionally performed by women, distorting economic understanding and reinforcing gender inequalities. Gender Bias in Economic Data Collection: Economic policies, planning, and fiscal assessments typically overlook gender-differentiated impacts, particularly women's invisible contributions, due to a lack of sex-disaggregated data. Economic Exploitation of Women’s Labour: Women's unpaid labour is treated as an inexhaustible and costless resource by governments and societies, resulting in economic policies disproportionately harming women, especially during austerity. Economic Loss due to Gender Inequality: By ignoring women’s unpaid contributions and limiting their participation in paid employment, economies lose out on substantial economic growth and productivity gains.

There is an easy fix to this problem. One study found that, with consistent childcare, mothers are twice as likely to keep their jobs. Another found that ‘government-funded preschool programs could increase the employment rate of mothers by 10 percent’.81 In 1997, the government of Quebec provided a natural experiment when they introduced a subsidy for childcare services.

We like to think that the unpaid work women do is just about individual women caring for their individual family members to their own individual benefit. It isn’t. Women’s unpaid work is work that society depends on, and it is work from which society as a whole benefits. When the government cuts public services that we all pay for with our taxes, demand for those services doesn’t suddenly cease. The work is simply transferred onto women, with all the attendant negative impacts on female paid labour-participation rates, and GDP. And so the unpaid work that women do isn’t simply a matter of ‘choice’. It is built into the system we have created – and it could just as easily be built out of it. We just need the will to start collecting the data, and then designing our economy around reality rather than a male-biased confection.

Wallet

Zombie Statistics: Misleading or false statistics repeatedly used without verification, influencing policies negatively. For instance, the belief that "70% of those living in poverty are women" is widely circulated without accurate backing. Gendered Poverty and Household Economics: Poverty measures typically assess households as single economic units, assuming resources are equally distributed. However, income controlled by women tends to benefit children and women more than income controlled by men. Joint vs. Individual Taxation: Joint taxation systems often penalize secondary earners (usually women), discouraging female employment and financial independence, thus reinforcing the gender pay gap. Gender-blind Tax and Economic Policies: Tax policies frequently ignore gender differences, leading to gendered outcomes, where women disproportionately bear the burden of budget cuts, austerity measures, and indirect taxes (e.g., VAT). Tax Avoidance by Multinationals and Gender Impact: Tax-avoidance practices by multinational corporations indirectly impact women, as governments compensate lost revenue through consumption taxes, disproportionately affecting women’s financial wellbeing and increasing unpaid care work burdens. --- 2. Examples/Stats: UK Child Benefit Experiment (1977): When child benefit shifted from tax deduction on a father’s income to cash payments to mothers, spending on women's and children's clothing significantly increased, indicating a positive redistribution from men to women. Karnataka Household Asset Survey (India): Found that traditional poverty measures overlook gender inequalities within households; while household-level data showed no gender difference in poverty, individual-level analysis revealed 71% of those in poverty were women. US Joint Tax Return System: 96% of married couples file jointly, leading women (usually secondary earners) to be disproportionately taxed at a higher rate than if they filed independently. Japan’s Tax Deduction: The 'head of household' deduction incentivizes women to work fewer hours; a survey showed over a third of married Japanese women curtailed working hours to qualify for tax breaks. Zambia Tax Avoidance Case: Tax evasion by multinational corporations like Glencore deprived Zambia of $1.2 billion—60% of the national health budget—forcing the government to increase indirect taxes like VAT, disproportionately impacting women.

analysis3 of the impact of female representation across nineteen OECD countries4 between 1960 and 2005 also found that female politicians are more likely to address issues that affect women.

The OECD study also found that women’s words translated into action. As female political representation increased in Greece, Portugal and Switzerland, these countries experienced an increase in educational investment. Conversely, as the proportion of female legislators in Ireland, Italy and Norway decreased in the late 1990s, those countries experienced ‘a comparable drop in educational expenditures as a percentage of GDP’.

Bernie Sanders said, ‘It is not good enough for someone to say, “I’m a woman! Vote for me!”’, he was wrong. The problem isn’t that anyone thinks that’s good enough. The problem is that no one does. On the other hand plenty of people seem to think that a candidate being a woman is a good enough reason not to vote for

Hillary Clinton was just too ambitious.

Being the first woman to occupy the most powerful role in the world does take an extraordinary level of ambition. But you could also argue that it’s fairly ambitious for a failed businessman and TV celebrity who has no prior political experience to run for the top political job in the world – and yet ambition is not a dirty word when it comes to Trump. Associate professor of psychology at UC Berkeley Rodolfo Mendoza-Denton has a cognitive explanation for why we may view Clinton’s ambition as ‘pathological’.15 She ‘was forging into a territory that is overwhelmingly associated in people’s minds with men’. As a result, he explains, voters experienced her candidacy as a norm violation.

The social downer on women being seen to seek professional power is partly because social power (being seen as warm and caring) is women’s ‘consolation prize for renouncing competition with men,’ write psychology professors Susan Fiske and Mina Cikara.18 Social power for women is therefore intrinsically incompatible with professional power: if a woman wants to be seen as competent she has to give up being seen as warm.

Projection bias amplified by a form of confirmation bias, if you like. Which goes some way towards explaining why it is so common to find male bias masquerading as gender neutrality. If the majority of people in power are men – and they are – the majority of people in power just don’t see it. Male bias just looks like common sense to them. But ‘common sense’ is in fact a product of the gender data gap.

quotas).

1. Core Concepts Professional vs. Social Power Double Bind: Women are socially expected to be warm and caring. Pursuing professional power (leadership, politics) is seen as violating this norm, resulting in a loss of perceived warmth or likeability. Male Bias as “Common Sense”: Because men dominate positions of power, their worldview and traits are seen as neutral and universal. This normalisation disguises male bias as objectivity. Projection Bias + Confirmation Bias: We assume others experience the world as we do. When most people in power are men, their experiences get projected as standard, reinforcing systemic bias. Democracy’s Gender Gap: Despite formal equality, male-dominated governments reflect male priorities. Women legislators bring different priorities and insights but remain severely underrepresented. Quota Systems as Corrective Tools: All-women shortlists (AWS) and electoral quotas (like Sweden’s zipper system) significantly boost women’s representation and have not harmed competence. --- 2. Examples & Statistics Warmth/Competence Trade-off (Fiske & Cikara): Women seen as competent are assumed less warm; warmth is a “consolation prize” for not competing with men. Use of AWS in the UK: In 1997, UK Labour used AWS in 50% of winnable seats. Result: number of female Labour MPs jumped from 37 → 101. By 2017, 43% of Labour MPs were women vs only 21% for Conservatives (who don’t use AWS). Global Representation: 23.5% average of women in parliaments worldwide as of 2017. Nordic countries average 41.4%, Arab countries just 18.3%. 10% or fewer female MPs in 30+ countries. UK Local Government: Nine councils have all-male cabinets. Only 33% of council chief executives are female. Women make up only 12% of elected metro mayors' cabinets. Sweden’s Zipper Quota: Alternating male and female names on party lists; representation never dropped below 40% since implementation.

stop

These pages from Chapter 14 of Invisible Women detail the systemic barriers, hostility, and violence female politicians face globally, even as formal legal and political equality has improved. It shows that increased female representation in government often intensifies backlash, leading to a deeply gendered experience of politics. --- 📘 Explanation of Chapter 14 (Pages shown) Theme: > “Political representation is not just about electing women—it’s about sustaining them in office and dismantling the male-dominated norms that punish them for being there.” --- 1. Key Problems Highlighted 🔹 Diminished Legislative Power Female legislators are less successful in passing legislation and less likely to be appointed to high-status committees, especially when working on women’s rights. Human rights issues sponsored by women get less support, especially from male politicians, who see them as less legitimate. 🔹 Psychological Warfare & Self-Censorship Women MPs face psychological constraints: travel restrictions, harassment, need to be accompanied, fear of retaliation. Many censor themselves, avoid social media, or stay silent to avoid threats and abuse. 🔹 Violence & Threats Female politicians, especially in Asia and Latin America, are more likely to leave politics early due to threats and aggression. Sweden: 1 in 3 female local politicians considered quitting due to threatening incidents. 🔹 Sexist Media and Online Abuse In Australia, 60% of women aged 18–21 and 80% over 30 said media coverage deterred them from entering politics. In Nigeria, political harassment caused a marked drop in female political participation between 2011–2015. --- 2. Institutional Exclusion and Cultural Resistance 🔹 Exclusion from Power Networks Women are excluded from informal male patronage networks (“backroom deals”), especially in post-conflict or conservative environments. Only 17% of US female legislators said male leaders consulted them regularly. 🔹 Interruptions & Undermining A 15-year study of US Supreme Court showed male justices interrupt female colleagues far more. Trump interrupted Clinton 51 times during a single debate (Clinton interrupted him 17 times). UK and US political debates routinely show men dominating speaking time and questioning women's credibility. 🔹 Sexual Harassment and Threats 66% of female MPs globally report harassment and misogyny. 1 in 5 have experienced sexual violence in office. During the 2010 Afghan elections, nearly all female candidates received threats. --- 3. Quotes to Remember > “Politics as it is practised today is not a female-friendly environment.” — Page 53% > “Common sense is in fact a product of the gender data gap.” — Page 51% > “Almost every day I fear for my life.” — Afghan MP, Fawzia Koofi --- --- 5. Suggestions & Structural Critique Legal quotas alone aren’t enough; informal exclusion must also be addressed. Enforce consequences for abuse, harassment, and obstruction (e.g. cutting off mics of bullies). Reform political cultures so that women can function freely—not just be elected. Recognise fear as gendered: Male-dominated systems fear losing control, which fuels aggression. Educate men and restructure power: Systems must be designed with women in mind, not just retrofitted. --- In Short > As female representation increases, so does hostility—especially from within the system. Women face not only structural obstacles, but relentless backlash, gatekeeping, and violence. Without overhauling political culture, more women in office won't mean better gender justice.

all.

These final pages of Chapter 14 of Invisible Women complete the picture of gendered exclusion in political life, highlighting how institutional biases, cultural norms, and lack of gender-aware policies continue to silence women even when they are technically “included.” --- 📘 Explanation of Pages 53–54% of Chapter 14 > Theme: Being elected is not the end of the struggle—staying in power, being heard, and changing systems is where the real battle lies. --- 1. Key Issues and Structures of Silencing 🔹 "Polite Interrupting" Doesn’t Work Kamala Harris was interrupted and labeled "hysterical" for persistent questioning—a gendered double standard. Her male colleagues were not similarly criticized. When women interrupt, it’s viewed as disruptive, not assertive. 🔹 The Illusion of Flat Structures Modern workplaces often eliminate formal hierarchies but do nothing to redistribute informal power—especially in male-dominated discussion formats like brainstorming. Women fight over the small piece of power that’s “left” to them in rooms filled with implicit male dominance. --- 2. Solutions Tried or Proposed ✅ Practical Fixes Track interruptions and allocate equal speaking time. These practices helped writers in shows like The Shield feel heard and be more effective. Shift to consensus-based decision-making instead of majority-based voting—improves women’s speech participation. ✅ Legal Safeguards Bolivia: Made political violence against women a criminal offense. 2016 law barred those with records of violence against women from holding public office. --- 3. The Fiction of 'Gender-Neutral Decorum' > “Most countries have no official procedure for settling sexual harassment complaints.” Decisions about what is 'indecorous' or sexist are often made by men, for men. In one case, a woman MP's request for a point of order after a sexist comment was denied with: > “I cannot control what another member thinks of you.” --- 4. Toxic Political Culture in the UK (Local Level) The UK scrapped its gender-specific code of conduct in 2010. A 2017 report by the Fawcett Society exposed: Sexism normalized in councils. Women told “run away little girl.” Female councillors described as "wives club" or dressed-up extras at events. Exclusion from email chains and meeting notifications. --- 5. Final Takeaways and Author’s Arguments 💡 Takeaway 1: Gender Data Gap at the Top > Excluding women from government is not just exclusion—it’s distorting the definition of the ‘best’ in leadership. "Best" should mean diverse, not simply rich, confident, and male. 💡 Takeaway 2: Legal Equality ≠ Real Equality > Legal equality of opportunity doesn’t mean anything if the system still skews results in favor of men. An evidence-based electoral system must be created—one that includes diverse lived experiences at the decision-making table. --- ✅ Summary of the Argument Across Pages Simply allowing women to enter politics doesn’t dismantle the gendered structures of silencing and exclusion. Structural reforms (quotas, participation tracking, cultural change) are essential, or else female political presence becomes symbolic at best and punished at worst. A diverse democracy demands not only gender parity in seats but equal voice, protection, and respect.

Rebuild?

Here’s a structured summary of Chapter 15: "Who Will Rebuild?" from Invisible Women by Caroline Criado Perez: --- 🧭 1. Core Concepts A. Disaster Response Magnifies the Gender Data Gap In post-crisis rebuilding (wars, natural disasters, pandemics), women are systematically left out of decision-making and planning. The result: homes are rebuilt without kitchens, refugee camps lack cooking facilities, and essential services like childcare and transport are ignored. B. Male-Dominated Planning Ignores Women's Needs Rebuilding plans often focus on economic development (skyscrapers, commerce) rather than community-level essentials (nursery schools, safety, informal networks). Example: the “We Will Rebuild” project in Miami after Hurricane Andrew had 56 men and only 11 women on its board. C. Social Networks and Informal Infrastructure Are Overlooked Public housing, like New Orleans’ Bricks, offered more than shelter—social cohesion and mobility—which was ignored in plans to demolish them post-Katrina. D. Post-Conflict Planning Ignores Women’s Voices Even when women are the most affected, they are excluded from peace-building and reconstruction. UN Security Council Resolution 1325 urges gender inclusion, but it’s largely symbolic—only 2 women have served as chief peace negotiators. E. Exclusion Weakens Peace and Development Women’s presence improves peace outcomes: 20% more likely peace will last 2 years. 35% more likely it will last 15 years. --- 📊 2. Examples & Stats Event/Context Issue Gender Gap Evidence Gujarat Earthquake (2001) Homes rebuilt without kitchens because women weren’t consulted “That’s women’s work” was assumed and ignored in planning Sri Lanka Tsunami (2004) Same issue repeated—no women consulted in reconstruction Kitchens not built again; refugee camps ignored cooking needs Hurricane Andrew (1992) “We Will Rebuild” had 56 men, 11 women in decision-making board Prioritized skyscrapers, not nurseries or women’s needs Hurricane Katrina (2005) African-American women were most displaced, but least consulted Led to what IWPR called a “third disaster”—preventable failure due to gender data gap New Orleans Public Housing Planners wanted mixed-income housing; residents (mostly poor Black women) wanted to return to Bricks Only 706 of 4,534 public units replaced; Bricks seen as community, not just housing UNSC Resolution 1325 (2000) Urged women’s inclusion in peace talks By 2018: 2 female chief negotiators ever, only 6% of negotiators were women in Afghanistan peace talks UN Peace Accord Study 182 peace agreements analyzed Women’s inclusion increases: 20% more chance of peace lasting 2 years 35% more chance for 15+ years | --- 💬 3. Impactful Quotes 1. “We need to focus on saving lives (as we will see this is also based on false premise). But the truth is, these excuses won’t wash. The real reason we exclude women is because we see the rights of 50% of the population as a minority interest.” 2. “Women frequently bring important issues to the peace-building agenda that male elites tend to overlook… closing the gender data gap really is better for everyone.” 3. “When the local government says ‘We don’t want women,’ the international community complies and says ‘OK.’” --- ✅ 4. Suggestions & Actionable Insights 🔹 Incorporate Women in Planning Always consult women during rebuilding, resettlement, and post-disaster processes. Recognize informal social infrastructure (e.g., community kitchens, mobility networks, safety concerns). 🔹 Legislate Gender Inclusion Treat exclusion from decision-making as a violation of rights, not a technical oversight. Enforce gender quotas on boards and decision-making panels in post-disaster or post-conflict contexts. 🔹 Use Gendered Data in Crisis Response Track unpaid labor, mobility patterns, and community ties that primarily affect women. Build evidence-based systems around women's actual needs—don’t just retrofit male-dominated structures. 🔹 Invest in Gender-Sensitive Peacebuilding Implement UNSCR 1325 with accountability—set funding and representation goals. Involve women from the start of peace talks, not only after agreements. --- 🔚 Concluding Message > The question "Who will rebuild?" must include "Whose voices were silenced before the collapse?" and "Whose needs are ignored after the dust settles?" Caroline Criado Perez shows us that unless women are actively included in rebuilding efforts—not just symbolically—disasters and wars don’t just destroy what existed, they help rebuild inequality stronger than before. Would you like a visual mind map or quote cards summarizing this chapter next?

Women are also more likely than men to die from the indirect effects of war.

not the disaster that kills them, explains Maureen Fordham. It’s gender – and a society that fails to account for how it restricts women’s lives. Indian men have been found to be more likely to survive earthquakes that hit at night ‘because they would sleep outside and on rooftops during warm nights, a behavior impossible for most women’.35 In Sri Lanka, swimming and tree climbing are ‘predominantly’ taught to men and boys; as a result, when the December 2004 tsunami hit (which killed up to four times as many women as men36) they were better able to survive the floodwaters.37 There is also a social prejudice against women learning to swim in Bangladesh, ‘drastically’ reducing their chances of surviving flooding,

Perhaps sex-segregation needs to extend beyond sanitation facilities, and perhaps no male staff should be in positions of power over vulnerable women.

The quarrels of popes and kings, with wars and pestilences, in every page; the men so good for nothing and hardly any women at all – it is very tiresome.

When we exclude half of humanity from the production of knowledge we lose out on potentially transformative insights. Would male mathematicians have come up with Taimina’s elegantly simple solution on their own?

we have to start taking account of women’s lives. In particular, we have to start accounting for the three themes that define women’s relationship with that world.

The first of these themes is the female body – or, to be precise – its invisibility.

collecting data, because when it comes to the second

third trend, which is perhaps the most significant in terms of its impact on women’s lives worldwide: unpaid care work.