Liberal MP says women prefer hairdressing and men drawn to maths in debate over gender quotas – The Guardian

Report on Parliamentary Discourse Concerning Gender Equality Policies and Sustainable Development Goals

Executive Summary

A report on statements made in the Australian Parliament by Liberal National Party MP Terry Young, who voiced opposition to gender quotas. The remarks, which suggested men and women are naturally inclined towards different professions, have significant implications for Australia’s progress towards key United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly those concerning gender equality, decent work, and reduced inequalities.

Analysis of Statements in Relation to SDG 5: Gender Equality

The discourse directly challenges the principles of SDG 5, which aims to achieve gender equality and empower all women and girls. The core arguments and their relation to this goal are outlined below:

• Argument Against Quotas: The MP argued that men are predominantly drawn to vocations involving mathematics and physical exertion, while women are inclined towards caring professions such as nursing and hairdressing. This position perpetuates gender stereotypes, which SDG 5 seeks to eliminate.
• Contradiction with Target 5.5: The rejection of affirmative action measures like quotas is in direct tension with SDG Target 5.5, which calls for ensuring women’s full and effective participation and equal opportunities for leadership in political, economic, and public life.
• Meritocracy vs. Equality: The MP contended that quotas are “demeaning” and undermine the principle of meritocracy, suggesting that individuals selected via quotas are perceived as not having earned their position. Proponents of quotas argue they are a necessary tool to correct systemic biases and achieve the equality of outcome envisioned by SDG 5.

Implications for SDG 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth

The debate over professional roles and hiring practices has clear implications for SDG 8, which promotes inclusive and sustainable economic growth, full and productive employment, and decent work for all.

• Occupational Segregation: The view that certain jobs are gender-specific reinforces occupational segregation. This can limit the talent pool for various industries and hinder progress towards SDG Target 8.5, which aims for full and productive employment and decent work for all women and men.
• Economic Empowerment: Restricting women’s access to traditionally male-dominated fields, which often offer higher pay, can perpetuate the gender pay gap, undermining the SDG 8 principle of “equal pay for work of equal value.”
• Inclusive Growth: Achieving the broad-based economic growth outlined in SDG 8 requires leveraging the full potential of the entire workforce, free from gender-based limitations or stereotypes.

Political Context and Alignment with SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

The political reaction to the statements underscores the broader national conversation on policies designed to achieve SDG 10, which focuses on reducing inequality within and among countries.

1. Government Response: The Labor government, through Infrastructure Minister Catherine King, strongly refuted the MP’s claims, stating, “Your gender never means a job is off-limits.” This response aligns with SDG Target 10.3, which mandates ensuring equal opportunity and reducing inequalities of outcome by eliminating discriminatory policies and practices.
2. Internal Party Debate: The Liberal Party is reportedly debating mechanisms to increase female representation, indicating a recognition of the need to address political inclusion. This internal conflict reflects the wider challenge of implementing policies that support SDG Target 10.2: to empower and promote the social, economic, and political inclusion of all, irrespective of sex.
3. Conclusion: The parliamentary exchange highlights a fundamental ideological conflict regarding the best methods to achieve a just and equitable society. The debate over quotas versus a merit-only approach is central to the practical implementation of SDGs 5, 8, and 10, revealing the persistent challenges in translating global development goals into effective national policy.

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

• SDG 5: Gender Equality

  This goal is central to the article, which revolves around a debate on gender quotas, women’s representation in politics, and gender stereotypes in employment. The comments by MP Terry Young about men and women being “naturally drawn to different kinds of jobs” and the subsequent pushback directly address the core principles of gender equality.

• SDG 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth

  The article discusses equal opportunities in employment. Young’s argument that positions should be based on “merit” versus the push for quotas to address gender imbalances relates to ensuring full and productive employment and decent work for all, particularly women.

• SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

  This goal is relevant as the article discusses policies (gender quotas) aimed at reducing inequality for specific groups, namely women and Indigenous people. Young’s comments that quotas are “demeaning” and “insulting” versus the view that they are necessary to ensure inclusion touches upon the broader theme of reducing social and economic inequalities.

• SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

  The discussion about the Liberal party debating “mechanisms to boost female representation in its parliamentary ranks” connects to the goal of building effective, accountable, and inclusive institutions at all levels. The underrepresentation of women in parliament is an issue of institutional inclusivity.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

1. Target 5.1: End all forms of discrimination against all women and girls everywhere.

   This target is relevant to the underlying issue of gender discrimination in the workplace. The debate over whether men and women are “wired” for certain jobs and the need for quotas implies a struggle against discriminatory practices and stereotypes that limit women’s career opportunities.

2. Target 5.5: Ensure women’s full and effective participation and equal opportunities for leadership at all levels of decision-making in political, economic and public life.

   This is directly addressed when the article mentions that “The Liberal party is now debating mechanisms to boost female representation in its parliamentary ranks.” The entire discussion about gender quotas in politics is aimed at achieving this target.

3. Target 8.5: By 2030, achieve full and productive employment and decent work for all women and men… and equal pay for work of equal value.

   The article’s focus on whether jobs should be assigned based on merit or gender quotas speaks to this target. Catherine King’s statement, “Your gender never means a job is off-limits,” explicitly supports the principle of equal opportunity in employment for all.

4. Target 10.2: By 2030, empower and promote the social, economic and political inclusion of all, irrespective of… sex… or other status.

   This target is reflected in the debate about quotas for “women or Indigenous people or any other cohort.” The article highlights the tension between promoting inclusion through affirmative action and the belief that such measures are “demeaning.”

5. Target 10.3: Ensure equal opportunity and reduce inequalities of outcome, including by eliminating discriminatory… policies and practices…

   The discussion around implementing quotas is a direct reference to a policy action intended to ensure equal opportunity. The article contrasts this with Young’s preference for hiring “exclusively on merit,” which he claims is a non-discriminatory practice.

6. Target 16.7: Ensure responsive, inclusive, participatory and representative decision-making at all levels.

   The effort by the Liberal party to “boost female representation in its parliamentary ranks” is a direct attempt to make a key decision-making institution (parliament) more inclusive and representative of the population it serves.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

• Proportion of seats held by women in national parliaments.

  This is a direct indicator for Targets 5.5 and 16.7. The article explicitly discusses the need to “boost female representation in its parliamentary ranks,” which is a measurable outcome.

• Proportion of women in specific occupations.

  This is an implied indicator for Target 8.5. Terry Young’s comments that professions like “hairdressing, nursing, social workers” will always be female-dominated, while “construction and trades” are for men, highlight occupational segregation. Measuring the proportion of women in these and other fields would track progress against these stereotypes.

• Existence of policies and legislation to promote gender equality and inclusion.

  This is an indicator for Targets 5.1 and 10.3. The entire debate about “gender quotas” is about a specific policy. Whether such quotas are adopted or rejected by the Liberal party would be a measurable data point on policy action.

• Proportion of positions held by specific groups (women, Indigenous people) in public and private institutions.

  This is an implied indicator for Target 10.2. Young’s reference to quotas for “women or Indigenous people” suggests that the representation of these groups in various positions is a key metric for assessing inclusion and the impact of policies like quotas.

4. Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: theguardian.com